"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
They are part of the reason that some people prefer the *wamth* of
vinyl. The warmth is just a perception of hum and rumble.

I disagree with that. IMO the warmth of analog is associated with
it's usually rolled off HF response and large amounts of low order
harmonic distortions.

That, too.

But I've heard digital recordings with huge amounts of Hum that don't
sound
at all "warm".
In fact it's easy to prove, take your most "digital" sounding recording,
add
in as much hum or rumble as you like.
(OK don't get too carried away so you can't hear the music anymore :-)
Does it really sound warm to you, or much the same with hum and rumble.
(The latter IMO)


No, you've got to wind down the treble as well.

geoff

wrote in message

A perfect turntable would sound like a quality CD player IF you played a
perfect disc on it. Unfortunately, recording lathes are not all that
great. Most of the flutter and rumble you hear is in the original: no
playback table, regardless of price, can eliminate it.

No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel there...

geoff

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 19:15:20 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote:


wrote in message

A perfect turntable would sound like a quality CD player IF you played a
perfect disc on it. Unfortunately, recording lathes are not all that
great. Most of the flutter and rumble you hear is in the original: no
playback table, regardless of price, can eliminate it.

No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel there...

geoff


How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:09:28 -0400, George M. Middius
wrote:

In Nerdville, approximating pi to three digits is considered hilarious.

In parts of America, it's considered a legal requirement that Pi be
exactly 3......................

Now, that *is* hilarious!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 12:43:24 +1000, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:

wrote in message
roups.com...
Next myth:

"play Beethoven's Eroica on one disc, one side"

There was abosulely no such factor used in determining play
time or disc size. There is ONE unsubstantiated legend, quoted
here from Pohlmann's "Principles of Digital Audio," 1995
McGraw-Hill, ch 9:

"Maximum disc playing time (strictly according to legend)
was determined after Philips consulted conductor Herbert
von Karajan. He advised them that a disc should be able
to hold his performance of the Beethoven Ninth Symphony
without interruption.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that this is anything
other than legend, as the basic physical properties were determined
well before any such input was solicited, by all accounts.

I still think it's partly a good legend, by all accounts other had similar
thoughts. And I would have too.
What is not known otherwise is why they chose an odd size for the disk
diameter.

Why is 120 mm an 'odd size?

A smaller disk set at 60 minutes capacity would have seemed more logical.
I've never heard anyone mention Eroica in this context before though!
Especially given it's length is only about 50 minutes.

You've never heard it because the legend refers to the Ninth, not the
Third, as noted above. Why is 60 minutes 'logical' in musical terms?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Barry Mann" wrote in message
om...
In the early days of CD's I'd accept the challenge of comparing a CD
player and an LP.
snip
And I did trick them, but the real point I was making, that well played
CD's and LP's don't sound as different as most "audiophiles" believe,
was not the point they wanted to hear.

Wow, I've never met anyone who couldn't pick the difference between an LP
and a CD. The surface noise will always give the LP away even with the best
audiophile pressings. Of course if you made a CD recording from the
turntable and then compared that, I would agree with you.

I think we can safely assume your test group can't pick the difference
between CD players though :-)

MrT.

"Geoff Wood" wrote in message
...
No, you've got to wind down the treble as well.

Just as I already said then, it's the rolled off treble that is the biggest
difference.

MrT.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel
there...

How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You could try Autotune. Might help, or make it worse!

MrT.

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
Why is 120 mm an 'odd size?

Well I suppose it's not TOO odd, but why was it chosen and not say 100mm, or
even 5 inches?
(Personally I would have choosen 100 mm or 125 mm if there were no other
factors.)
Do you know, or should we just leave it for someone who might!

A smaller disk set at 60 minutes capacity would have seemed more logical.
I've never heard anyone mention Eroica in this context before though!
Especially given it's length is only about 50 minutes.

You've never heard it because the legend refers to the Ninth, not the
Third, as noted above.

Exactly my point.

Why is 60 minutes 'logical' in musical terms?

Why were tapes made in 30 minute increments usually?
Why are our watches marked in 1 hour intervals?
Probably something to do with the accepted time standards being familiar.

MrT.

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 18:05:00 +1000, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel
there...

How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You could try Autotune. Might help, or make it worse!

MrT.


I'll take that as an "I haven't a clue".

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Pukey said:

In Nerdville, approximating pi to three digits is considered hilarious.

In parts of America, it's considered a legal requirement that Pi be
exactly 3......................

Now, that *is* hilarious!

Sure is! I can hear the propellers twirling in Aberdeen!

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You could try Autotune. Might help, or make it worse!

I'll take that as an "I haven't a clue".

YOU probably don't!

Autotune can obviously "try" to reduce the wow and flutter.
Some people don't like the effect auto tune has though.
As with everything, YOU have to try it for yourself and decide.
What else do you expect?

MrT.

Mr.T wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
Frankly I think the need for time sync, or even level matched, is
over-rated.

I can ace any DBT that is not time synched within maybe 10
milliseconds.

What do you mean by "ACE".

I mean correctly identifying A and B in an ABX test 12,14,16 times out
of 16.

If I present you with 2 non sync, non level
matched CD players, sure you can say they are different. But I bet
you can't tell me which is which.

Sure, I can correctly identify each unknown, whether it is A or B.
There's a slight echo when switching between unmatched players.

After I have started and stopped and changed levels a few times, I
bet you can't tell which is which.

Mr. T, get your hiney up here from Australia and I'll take your money
with a smile.

The trick here is that you can stop and change levels without
switching :-)

There's no trick in my claim. I don't need optimal levels, I can do it
over a range of reasonable listening levels. I don't need music that
plays at just one volume, I can do it as the music changes volume.

All you can say is that one sounds different at each instant because
of the different levels.

Not at all. I identify the players by listening for a slight echo at
the switchover point.

I've said this many times on Usenet. Thanks Mr. T for showing one and
all that you haven't done your homework.

Barry Mann wrote:
In , on 04/09/05
at 12:11 PM, "Mr.T" MrT@home said:

I can ace any DBT that is not time synched within maybe 10
milliseconds.

It would be interesting to test Arny's assertion sometime, but I get
to determine the "when to switch" criteria. (and it would be
mechanized in the spirit of ABX)

The choice of switchover point is not mechanized, if that is what you
are saying.

It's up to the listener. I think maybe you haven't done your homework
about ABX. Here's where to pick your first assignment up:
www.pcabx.com .

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 19:55:21 +1000, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You could try Autotune. Might help, or make it worse!

I'll take that as an "I haven't a clue".

YOU probably don't!

Autotune can obviously "try" to reduce the wow and flutter.
Some people don't like the effect auto tune has though.
As with everything, YOU have to try it for yourself and decide.
What else do you expect?

MrT.


I think that Autotune works - just - with a single voice. I have -
just for fun - tried it on a whole mix, and the result is the most
unmusical muddle I've ever heard.

As for wow, I imagine that as it is of known frequency, you could get
rid of a lot of it by frequency modulating the waveform in opposite
phase. That would be hard work to get right.

Flutter - which is what we were talking about - is noiselike, and not
amenable to any kind of correction.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Mr.T wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote:

A difference of 0.005% in playback speed would allow
the accumulation of 0.021 seconds of error over the
entire length of a 70 minute CD.

IME delays some place around 10 mSec, can enable one to reliably
hear
echoes during quick switching.

Just why would anyone need to be "quick switching" during a normal
music listening session?

They wouldn't because normal music listening isn't the same as
listening to compare audio equipment.

This requires an ADC and DAC that are so good that you can convince
yourself that they aren't masking audible differences. Not all that
hard these days.

Usually impossible though to convince others, so a different method
is often required.

It's very easy to convince people of a logical bent that an audio
component is highly sonically transparent. Just re-record some
critical diagnostic audio through it about 10 times in a row. If they
can't hear the degradation for say 10 passes, they can easily convince
themselves that one pass will add no audible degradation.

Note that I said "people of a logical bent". That automatically leaves
out all high end audio dupes and true believers.

The second is to run the clock of one of the two player's clock
with
an external adjustable VFO, and use that to manover them into
synch,
and keep them there.

Or accept that one does NOT need to prove instantaneous switching
may
show some detectable transient.

Quick switching is well known by people of a logical bent to provide
the most sensitive possible results.

Intentionally de-sensitize yourself at your own risk.

What is required is proof of a real day to day difference in normal
listening.

That would be a very low bar. If you are satisfied with tests that you
have made less sensitive than is reasonably possible, that is your
situation, not mine.

Even a ten second gap during switching masks sync errors
and small level errors.

A 10 second gap also vastly desensitizes the listener. This is easy to
prove with the PCABX comparitor because it has an adjustable switching
delay feature. The PCABX web site helps because its Training Room page
has a good selection of graded listening tests. Most people find that
long switching delays make it impossible to do well in tests that they
can easily accomplish with a shorter delay.

Of course IF that's what you are trying to prove, OK, but why?

I'm just trying to get the most sensitive reasonably possible results.
If you don't like that, that would be your problem, not mine.

Mr.T wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
This is one reason why I suggest that very few people have ever
actually done a proper comparison of two CD players, one in which
bias, time synch, and levels were adequately matched.

Because many people don't agree on the need, and many others cannot
be
convinced by scientific proof anyway.

That's their problem, not mine.

Geoff Wood wrote:
wrote in message

A perfect turntable would sound like a quality CD player IF you
played a perfect disc on it. Unfortunately, recording lathes are
not all that great. Most of the flutter and rumble you hear is in
the original: no playback table, regardless of price, can eliminate
it.

No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel
there...

The flutter has been fixed with some very powerful software. The
correction was based on cancelling out the FM distortion in the bias
signal from a tape that was transcribed using a special tape head with
a very small gap.

The rumble seems a little bit tougher of a nut to crack. Some rumble
is deterministic and could probably be detected and cancelled out as
well.

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 19:15:20 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote:


wrote in message

A perfect turntable would sound like a quality CD player IF you
played a perfect disc on it. Unfortunately, recording lathes are
not all that great. Most of the flutter and rumble you hear is in
the original: no playback table, regardless of price, can
eliminate
it.

No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel
there...

geoff


How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You use special software that detects FM modulation on the bias. This
obviously only works with tape. The tape has to be played with a tape
head that has a very narrow gap.

This procedure is described someplace on the web. It has been used to
repair some classic recordings that were spoiled by equipment
problems.

Mr.T wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
They are part of the reason that some people prefer the *wamth*
of
vinyl. The warmth is just a perception of hum and rumble.

I disagree with that. IMO the warmth of analog is associated with
it's usually rolled off HF response and large amounts of low order
harmonic distortions.

That, too.

But I've heard digital recordings with huge amounts of Hum that
don't
sound at all "warm".

This trick only works so much.

In fact it's easy to prove, take your most "digital" sounding
recording, add in as much hum or rumble as you like.
(OK don't get too carried away so you can't hear the music anymore
:-)
Does it really sound warm to you, or much the same with hum and
rumble. (The latter IMO)

Actually, there's a DAW plug-in that adds most of the common vinyl
artifacts.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message



How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

Flutter being a frequency moduation, quantify it then apply the inverse.
Even if the modulation varies over time, I'm sure computers are clever enuf
to cope with that. The hum equally.

geoff

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:09:28 -0400, George M. Middius
wrote:

In Nerdville, approximating pi to three digits is considered hilarious.

In parts of America, it's considered a legal requirement that Pi be
exactly 3......................

Now, that *is* hilarious!

Not "3" , but "3 and 14/100" . **** the rest....

geoff

PS We missed Jupiter by how far ?

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message

Why is 120 mm an 'odd size?

'Cos nobody would admit to having a mere 4 3/4" .

Most would hopefully claim 165mm, wishing to be marginally (modestly so)
grander than the statistical average 150mm.

geoff

"R" wrote in message
.11...
Roger Russell says that not all CDP sound the same. I, for one, agree
with
him as I have experienced these differences myself.

Not all CD players sound the same. I can't speak for imaging because at the
time I did some tests my speakers were not set up in an acoustic space that
allowed imaging very well. However some players simply sound better. In
one test, my Sony walkman sounded better than my more expensive JVC full
size player (less grain in the treble.) IMO, it should not be hard to
create a CD player that reproduces the bitstream perfectly. Anyone that
doesn't in this day and age has a design flaw (and many of them do.) You
can create a perfect bitstream on your computer with a $20 CD player, what's
so hard about getting a home player right? Well for one thing, a home
player must be real time, while your computer CD player can be buffered with
hardware and/or software. Obvious answer - buffer the home player in a
similar way. That does not take into account the DAC, but still - there's
no reason that "jitter" etc should exists nowadays.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

Wow, I've never met anyone who couldn't pick the difference between an LP
and a CD. The surface noise will always give the LP away even with the
best
audiophile pressings.

That's not true. I've heard good records played back on good systems where
the master tape hiss (though it was not very loud) nullified any record
surface noise. You truly could not tell if you were listening to the master
tape or not. Obviously if the medium were CD the same master tape hiss
would be present.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Also, there is little question that a higher sample rate would have
beneficial aspects. 44.1 was determined by predetermined edicts of
disc size and playing time-it had to fit a drive that would fit a PC
drive bay and play Beethoven's Eroica on one disc, one side.

That all sounds like nonsense to me. (I have heard of Beethoven's Ninth
being a standard though.)

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 23:57:36 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message



How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

Flutter being a frequency moduation, quantify it then apply the inverse.
Even if the modulation varies over time, I'm sure computers are clever enuf
to cope with that. The hum equally.

geoff


And given that 99% of music has vibrato?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Colin B." wrote in message
...

Interesting stuff. I would agree that not all CD players sound alike,
although the differences are small. However when he talks about imaging,
I start to get queasy. The beauty of imaging as a measure for audio
quality,
is that it's an unmeasurable quantity, and thus no one can prove you
wrong.

Well, I don't really think it's immeasurable. The problem with imaging is
that it depends on room acoustics and setup as well as source media and
playback equipment. As far as measuring it, as long as you can determine
that the signal coming from each channel matches *exactly* the original,
then that's all you need to do. Nothing magical happens when the sound
actually gets played back in real space.

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

That be the real problem. I was once fortunate enough to hear the
legendary Rockport Sirius III with a Clearaudio Insider cartridge, all
set up by Andy Payor himself. While certainly about the best I'd ever
heard from vinyl, it still suffered weak low bass, splashy treble,
surface noise, clicks and inner-groove distortion. Why? Because it was
playing *vinyl*.

Then you're listening to a crap recording or poor system setup (or, not
having heard those components, possibly just poor quality components.)

In article ,
"Geoff Wood" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message news:smcatut-\

My good turntable more-or-less forced me to upgrade cd players. The
difference is that when I got to "as good as it gets for me" level for
cd, I felt I could trust cd sound enough to use it as a comparative
reference.

Are you sure your CD player wasn't broken ?

The 1985 Pioneer, 1990ish NAD and the CAL DX2 were arguably broken when
they left the factory. The ARC CD1 had a factory service so can be
presumed not broken.

Stephen

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
If I present you with 2 non sync, non level
matched CD players, sure you can say they are different. But I bet
you can't tell me which is which.

Sure, I can correctly identify each unknown, whether it is A or B.
There's a slight echo when switching between unmatched players.

Not with a pause in between! As I said, I can also pause but NOT switch
players. How do you tell?

After I have started and stopped and changed levels a few times, I
bet you can't tell which is which.

Mr. T, get your hiney up here from Australia and I'll take your money
with a smile.

Come down here and I'll take your Yankee dollars with pleasure :-)

The trick here is that you can stop and change levels without
switching :-)

There's no trick in my claim. I don't need optimal levels, I can do it
over a range of reasonable listening levels. I don't need music that
plays at just one volume, I can do it as the music changes volume.

You keep ignoring what I said.

All you can say is that one sounds different at each instant because
of the different levels.

Not at all. I identify the players by listening for a slight echo at
the switchover point.

As I said, a pause will stop you in your tracks then!
All you are doing is identifying a switch point, not a player in any case.

I've said this many times on Usenet. Thanks Mr. T for showing one and
all that you haven't done your homework.

It seems to me you are advocating a method that allows you to pick a change,
then specifying a complex method to eliminate that possibility.
All rather unnecessary IMO. No need for time sync if there is a pause in
switching.

MrT.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
They wouldn't because normal music listening isn't the same as
listening to compare audio equipment.

So it has no purpose for people who want to listen to music then?

Note that I said "people of a logical bent". That automatically leaves
out all high end audio dupes and true believers.

The very people we are testing. The rest already know the facts.

Quick switching is well known by people of a logical bent to provide
the most sensitive possible results.

Of the switching point, but totally unrelated to real listening.

Intentionally de-sensitize yourself at your own risk.

Intentionally make your life difficult if you want. You still seem to agree
wih the result.

That would be a very low bar. If you are satisfied with tests that you
have made less sensitive than is reasonably possible, that is your
situation, not mine.

They are adequate so far. Will be improved if necessary. ie. someone passes.

A 10 second gap also vastly desensitizes the listener. This is easy to
prove with the PCABX comparitor because it has an adjustable switching
delay feature. The PCABX web site helps because its Training Room page
has a good selection of graded listening tests. Most people find that
long switching delays make it impossible to do well in tests that they
can easily accomplish with a shorter delay.

Yep. That's my point. Turning off the HiFi for 10 seconds has the same
effect as buying a much more expensive one :-)
Your "difference" just disappeared!

So make sure you NEVER stop listening to that $10k CD player or it will
become a $200 one :-)

I'm just trying to get the most sensitive reasonably possible results.
If you don't like that, that would be your problem, not mine.

No problem for me at all.

MrT.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Because many people don't agree on the need, and many others cannot
be convinced by scientific proof anyway.

That's their problem, not mine.

You've invested a lot of time making it your problem :-)

MrT.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Actually, there's a DAW plug-in that adds most of the common vinyl
artifacts.

There are a few in fact. Some people even use them I think, but god knows
why!
A bit of EQ is OK though, IMO.

MrT.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
And given that 99% of music has vibrato?

Then you probably won't be thrilled by the result.

MrT.

In , on 04/09/05
at 06:07 AM, "Arny Krueger" said:



Barry Mann wrote:
In , on 04/09/05
at 12:11 PM, "Mr.T" MrT@home said:

I can ace any DBT that is not time synched within maybe 10
milliseconds.

It would be interesting to test Arny's assertion sometime, but I get
to determine the "when to switch" criteria. (and it would be
mechanized in the spirit of ABX)

The choice of switchover point is not mechanized, if that is what you
are saying.

It's up to the listener. I think maybe you haven't done your homework
about ABX. Here's where to pick your first assignment up:
www.pcabx.com .

I didn't say I would deny you the button to push, but I will obscure
the delay. For most of us of the test objective is to decide which
unit might sound better by some personal criteria. It's not an ego
inflating contest to see which of us has the best time domain
resolution. If you can or do solely use the delay to base your
comparison, the protocol is flawed and the results, other than
discrediting the protocol, are worthless.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

In , on 04/09/05
at 06:19 AM, "Arny Krueger" said:



Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 19:15:20 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
wrote:


wrote in message

A perfect turntable would sound like a quality CD player IF you
played a perfect disc on it. Unfortunately, recording lathes are
not all that great. Most of the flutter and rumble you hear is in
the original: no playback table, regardless of price, can
eliminate
it.

No, but you could load it into a DAW and fix the flutter and rumbel
there...

geoff


How do you fix flutter in a DAW?

You use special software that detects FM modulation on the bias. This
obviously only works with tape. The tape has to be played with a tape
head that has a very narrow gap.

This procedure is described someplace on the web. It has been used to
repair some classic recordings that were spoiled by equipment
problems.


I read their account, it's very ingeresting. I believe they have a
patent on the process. Anyway, they are offering the process as a
service.

-----------------------------------------------------------
spam:
wordgame:123(abc):14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13 (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

Mr.T said:

Because many people don't agree on the need, and many others cannot
be convinced by scientific proof anyway.

That's their problem, not mine.

You've invested a lot of time making it your problem :-)

The Krooborg is intent on making everybody else as miserable and disgusting
as he is. Like many psychotics, he has delusions about his own influence on
others that are grossly disproportionate to reality.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Colin B. said:

That's because you didn't apply the correct typographical mistakes.

Now THAT is the funniest thing I've heard in a while!

In Nerdville, approximating pi to three digits is considered hilarious.

In Middiusville, a three digit IQ is considered unattainable.

- Gary Rosen

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Mr.T said:

Because many people don't agree on the need, and many others cannot
be convinced by scientific proof anyway.

That's their problem, not mine.

You've invested a lot of time making it your problem :-)

The Krooborg is intent on making everybody else as miserable and
disgusting
as he is. Like many psychotics, he has delusions about his own influence
on
others that are grossly disproportionate to reality.

Maybe not so disproportionate, considering your neurotic obsession with him
:^).

- Gary Rosen