Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #601   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
MINe 109 wrote:
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

Letsee how many times do we have to explain this to
Jenn? I'm in a generous mood today - I'll cast my
pearls in front of the the swine one more time! ;-)

(1) The CD format is capable of sonically perfect
reproduction of any known audio signal.

Below 20kHz.

(2) However, there are no known audio signals that
perfectly represent live music.

Gotcha.

(3) Even though the CD format reproduces *any* audio
signal audibly


I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity
without an ulterior motive. I know less than little about
electronic technology. I'm told that cd is perfect at
reproducing the digital master.


Digital copies are generally completely perfect.

Is the digital
master better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


Yes.

Evidence etc. please.


*any* relevant unbiased objective or subjective measure.

For example, analog masters are generally 15 ips magnetic tape. A first
generation copy of 15 ips magnetic tape can be detected in an ABX test. The
copy can be reliably distingushed from the source for even just one
generation of copying.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_tapg.htm

The essence of creating a master is copying some analog or digital source
onto the mastering media, whether analog tape or digital media.

An analog source can be digitized and converted back to an analog signal
that copies the source, and the source will be indistinguishable from the
copy.

IOW a good ADC driving a good DAC will produce a signal that is audibly
indistinguishable from the ADC's input signal. The copy and the source can't
be distinguished from each other. This can extend over a goodly number of
generations:

http://www.pcabx.com/product/cardd_deluxe/index.htm

A digital source can be copied exactly, so the copy and the source are
indistinguishable.


Arny, I truly appreciate your prompt answer and I do not intend to
carp. But I do not think
that we're talking about the same thing.
My fault no doubt- not explaining myself adequately.
I do not doubt that you can get near perfect digital COPIES from any
manufactured source.
(If you don't understand what I mean by "manufactured" I'm sorry- can
not think of a better synonym right now. Just try to be with me-
believe me discussion is more interesting and helpful that way)
For instance I can burn near-perfect ( to my ears) copies of music
disks on my computer. That's digital enough for me. I need no
convincing.
What I want to know is : is there any evidence that LIVE music is
captured better by digital than analogue master?
Once again: D'Agostino and Meitner do not (or did not) think so. And
they are both producing DIGITAL components. (very,very high end digital
components) So they have no axe to grind..
And again: the golden age of LP. were the sixties- some of it ( now
don't change what I say SOME) still unsurpassed..
Ludovic Mirabel
I've been nice long enough. Now for a bit of carping RAO style.
Somewhere you said that you listened to Meitner's stuff and found it
unexciting. (or words to that effect). Isn't it an article of faith
that all the competently designed amps. sound the same. Did you ABX
Meitner- or did you, lord forbid- judge it SIGHTED? Horrors.

  #602   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

Letsee how many times do we have to explain this to
Jenn? I'm in a generous mood today - I'll cast my pearls
in front of the the swine one more time! ;-)

(1) The CD format is capable of sonically perfect
reproduction of any known audio signal.


Below 20kHz.


greater than 20 KHz isn't really audio for human listeners.

(2) However, there are no known audio signals that
perfectly represent live music.


Gotcha.


Got *everybdy*.

(3) Even though the CD format reproduces *any* audio
signal audibly perfectly, there are no known perfect
audio signals representing live music available to
reproduce.


Below 20kHz,


greater than 20 KHz isn't really audio for human listeners.

and barring technical quibles about filters, jitter, etc.


Only small boys worry about those issues these days.


(4) Therefore the CD format like every other format
including direct feeds from the finest microphones,
cannot perfectly reproduce any example of live music.


Okay.


Huzzah!

Jenn is as usual resorting to debating trade tactics in
order to score points. She's faulting a superior format
for not being able to do the impossible.


My question for you is similar to hers: given the
imperfections of recording, mastering and the cd medium,
what cds would you say do a good job of preserving the
massed string sound of an orchestra?


Answering that question properly would require that I review several 100
hours of recordings.

If I agreed to answer it, it would be about a six months from now before I
would know the answer.


Why?
  #603   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

wrote in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
MINe 109 wrote:
In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

Letsee how many times do we have to explain this to
Jenn? I'm in a generous mood today - I'll cast my
pearls in front of the the swine one more time! ;-)

(1) The CD format is capable of sonically perfect
reproduction of any known audio signal.

Below 20kHz.

(2) However, there are no known audio signals that
perfectly represent live music.

Gotcha.

(3) Even though the CD format reproduces *any* audio
signal audibly


I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity
without an ulterior motive. I know less than little
about electronic technology. I'm told that cd is
perfect at reproducing the digital master.


Digital copies are generally completely perfect.

Is the digital
master better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


Yes.

Evidence etc. please.


*any* relevant unbiased objective or subjective measure.

For example, analog masters are generally 15 ips
magnetic tape. A first generation copy of 15 ips
magnetic tape can be detected in an ABX test. The copy
can be reliably distingushed from the source for even
just one generation of copying.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_tapg.htm

The essence of creating a master is copying some analog
or digital source onto the mastering media, whether
analog tape or digital media.

An analog source can be digitized and converted back to
an analog signal that copies the source, and the source
will be indistinguishable from the copy.

IOW a good ADC driving a good DAC will produce a signal
that is audibly indistinguishable from the ADC's input
signal. The copy and the source can't be distinguished
from each other. This can extend over a goodly number of
generations:

http://www.pcabx.com/product/cardd_deluxe/index.htm

A digital source can be copied exactly, so the copy and
the source are indistinguishable.


Arny, I truly appreciate your prompt answer and I do not
intend to carp. But I do not think
that we're talking about the same thing.


My fault no doubt- not explaining myself adequately.
I do not doubt that you can get near perfect digital
COPIES from any manufactured source.


Or at home using recordable digital media.

(If you don't understand what I mean by "manufactured"
I'm sorry- can not think of a better synonym right now.
Just try to be with me- believe me discussion is more
interesting and helpful that way)


For instance I can burn near-perfect ( to my ears) copies
of music disks on my computer. That's digital enough for
me. I need no convincing.


In general, these copies are not near-perfect in terms of digital data. As a
rule if made with resonable care, they are functionally perfect.

What I want to know is : is there any evidence that LIVE
music is captured better by digital than analogue master?


Yes.

Once again: D'Agostino and Meitner do not (or did not)
think so.


This is a very self-serving belief for them to hold onto. AFAIK its not
based on bias-controlled listening tests, and its unlikely that they, like
say John Curl or John Atkinson will ever in their lives do a proper
listening test to confirm their beliefs.

And they are both producing DIGITAL components.
(very,very high end digital components) So they have no
axe to grind..


They do have an axe to grind. They assert that their equipment is as good if
not better than any other equipment of similar kind that exists, but that
even so their equipment could sound better. That allows them to shortly come
out with "improved" products while maintaining the appearance of credibility
in the market place.

This particular logical trick is at or near the core of the most of the high
end audio industry. That's one of the problems with admitting that a
particular piece of gear is sonically transparent - its sound quality cannot
be improved for fun and profit.



  #604   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com
What I want to know is : is there any evidence that LIVE
music is captured better by digital than analogue master?


Yes.


I don't disagree. See my earlier post on the Mozart recording I
produced.

Once again: D'Agostino and Meitner do not (or did not)
think so.


This is a very self-serving belief for them to hold onto. AFAIK its
not based on bias-controlled listening tests, and its unlikely that
they, like say John Curl or John Atkinson will ever in their lives do
a proper listening test to confirm their beliefs.


A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr. Krueger's
pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's beliefs, one
does them to find out whether a phenomenon is audible. And
as Mr. Krueger knows (because I listed them for him at the
HE2005 debate) I have taken part in many such tests, including
ABX testing of absolute polarity, something that prior to the test I
did not believe audible. Scoring 10 correct out of 10 trials using the
ABX box was evidence that my belief was wrong.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #605   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
ups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com
What I want to know is : is there any evidence that LIVE
music is captured better by digital than analogue master?


Yes.


I don't disagree. See my earlier post on the Mozart recording I
produced.

Once again: D'Agostino and Meitner do not (or did not)
think so.


This is a very self-serving belief for them to hold onto. AFAIK its
not based on bias-controlled listening tests, and its unlikely that
they, like say John Curl or John Atkinson will ever in their lives do
a proper listening test to confirm their beliefs.


A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr. Krueger's
pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's beliefs, one
does them to find out whether a phenomenon is audible.


And if one's belief is that there is no difference,
the test is useless, because it is not
designed to remove that particular listener bias.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access


  #606   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP



Clyde Slick said:

A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr. Krueger's
pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's beliefs, one
does them to find out whether a phenomenon is audible.


And if one's belief is that there is no difference,
the test is useless, because it is not
designed to remove that particular listener bias.


Krooger's "belief" is like the "belief" of christian fundies about
"God".... They "know" that "God is always with us". I think they use "know"
instead of "believe" because they have an irrational amount of baggage
attached to what we know is just a belief.




  #607   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com


Once again: D'Agostino and Meitner do not (or did not)
think so.


This is a very self-serving belief for them to hold
onto. AFAIK its not based on bias-controlled listening
tests, and its unlikely that they, like say John Curl or
John Atkinson will ever in their lives do a proper
listening test to confirm their beliefs.


A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr.
Krueger's
pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's beliefs, one
does them to find out whether a phenomenon is audible.


Usual Atkinsonian hair-splitting noted.

And
as Mr. Krueger knows (because I listed them for him at the
HE2005 debate) I have taken part in many such tests,
including
ABX testing of absolute polarity, something that prior to
the test I did not believe audible. Scoring 10 correct
out of 10 trials using the ABX box was evidence that my
belief was wrong.


A single trivial test does not disprove the observable rule that John
Atkinson does not in general do DBTs.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile



  #608   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
asked of Arny Krueger:
MINe 109 asked of Arny Krueger:
given the imperfections of recording, mastering and the
cd medium, what cds would you say do a good job of
preserving the massed string sound of an orchestra?


I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity without an
ulterior motive. I know less than little about
electronic technology. I'm told that cd is perfect at
reproducing the digital master. Is the digital master
better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


I did such a comparison when I produced the Mozart
recording
reported on at
http://www.stereophile.com/musicrecordings/804k622/. We
were recording the clarinet and orchestra using a DSD
recorder (for SACD release), analog tape at 15ips with
Dolby-A noise reduction, and with a 16-bit/44.1k PCM
recorder to make CD-Rs for me to take with me after the
sessions.

In comparisons with the mike feed, the DSD to me was
identical.
Both the PCM and analog were different from the live
feed, but listeners preferred the analog tape,
particularly in the sound of strings.

The SACD we released has versions of the concerto mastered
from DSD and from analog tape transcribed both to DSD and
16-bit PCM, as well as a CD layer transcribed from DSD and
analog. It should answer some questions. We have very few
left
in stock, but I will happily send Jenn one to audition.


Two words: sighted evaluation.

One word: invalid


  #609   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
its unlikely that they, like say John Curl or
John Atkinson will ever in their lives do a proper
listening test to confirm their beliefs.


A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr.
Krueger's pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's
beliefs, one does them to find out whether a phenomenon
is audible.


Usual...hair-splitting noted.


I snipped your usual name-calling, Mr. Krueger. And no, this is
not hair-splitting. Scientific method demands an agnostic attitude
on the part of the experimenter when he both designs and performs
the test. Otherwise the _tester's_ bias affects the results. Both Tom
Nousaine's and Howard Ferstler's published blind tests have
suffered from this problem.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #610   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Jenn" wrote in message
...
: In article ,
: Steven Sullivan wrote:
:
: Jenn wrote:
: Sure. The ability to perfectly replicate the sound of an actual
: instrument requires perfect frequency matching, perfect timbre, super
: attention to detail (the ability to hear the bow on the string, for
: example), perfect dynamic nuance, and perfect spacial cues. That's just
: a start.
:
: But alas there's no evidence that modern recording can't capture all of those
: completely, except for spatial cues.
:
: I see what you mean. But I'm confident that in any reasonable test, I
: could tell the actual violin playing from any recording 100% of the
: time, and I think that more than just spatial cues must come into play.

I'd be interested to know what you'd think of the "best possible"
reproduction, something like a live feed from a pair of AKG CK62 capsules,
amplified and played through a Stax headphone set - how close a call
that is ? Maybe if you come around some studio in the near fu.. ?

Rudy




  #611   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Robert Morein
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

"John Atkinson" wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
its unlikely that they, like say John Curl or
John Atkinson will ever in their lives do a proper
listening test to confirm their beliefs.


A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr.
Krueger's pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's
beliefs, one does them to find out whether a phenomenon
is audible.


Usual...hair-splitting noted.


I snipped your usual name-calling, Mr. Krueger. And no, this is
not hair-splitting. Scientific method demands an agnostic attitude
on the part of the experimenter when he both designs and performs
the test. Otherwise the _tester's_ bias affects the results.


This is nonsense. Humans always have tester's bias. The important thing is
for the scientist to design a methodology that neutralizes this bias during
the experiment. Arny's tests accomplish this. If your hypothesis was
correct no science would ever be validly performed.

Bob

  #612   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP



Bwian whined:

I snipped your usual name-calling, Mr. Krueger. And no, this is
not hair-splitting. Scientific method demands an agnostic attitude
on the part of the experimenter when he both designs and performs
the test. Otherwise the _tester's_ bias affects the results.


This
Arny
no science


Bwian, it's well known that Australians have the highest per-capita ice
cream consumption rate in the civilized world. What kind of "entrepreneur"
could tank an ice cream parlor in Australia?





  #613   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


Clyde Slick said:

A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr. Krueger's
pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's beliefs, one
does them to find out whether a phenomenon is audible.


And if one's belief is that there is no difference,
the test is useless, because it is not
designed to remove that particular listener bias.


Krooger's "belief" is like the "belief" of christian fundies about
"God".... They "know" that "God is always with us". I think they use
"know"
instead of "believe" because they have an irrational amount of baggage
attached to what we know is just a belief.


Fundamentalist Christian beliefs ceratinly aren't knowledge,
we know that the Old Testament version of Creationsism
did not happen. Nor does Intelligent Design derive from
science, it is just another belief, a pathetic backpedaling from
Creationism. It is more pathetic than Creationsism, and
only demeans the who profess it, by
pointing out their hypocricy and lack of Christian Faith.
If one is going to be a Fundamentalist Bible thumping Chrisitian,
"at least" they should stick with the program.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  #614   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com

And
as Mr. Krueger knows (because I listed them for him at the
HE2005 debate) I have taken part in many such tests,
including
ABX testing of absolute polarity, something that prior to
the test I did not believe audible. Scoring 10 correct
out of 10 trials using the ABX box was evidence that my
belief was wrong.


A single trivial test does not disprove the observable rule that John
Atkinson does not in general do DBTs.


you don't do them in general either.

http://tinyurl.com/prf7m

http://tinyurl.com/rxm3c

You should be doing one every morning.




you should be doing



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  #615   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
asked of Arny Krueger:
MINe 109 asked of Arny Krueger:
given the imperfections of recording, mastering and the
cd medium, what cds would you say do a good job of
preserving the massed string sound of an orchestra?

I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity without an
ulterior motive. I know less than little about
electronic technology. I'm told that cd is perfect at
reproducing the digital master. Is the digital master
better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


I did such a comparison when I produced the Mozart
recording
reported on at
http://www.stereophile.com/musicrecordings/804k622/. We
were recording the clarinet and orchestra using a DSD
recorder (for SACD release), analog tape at 15ips with
Dolby-A noise reduction, and with a 16-bit/44.1k PCM
recorder to make CD-Rs for me to take with me after the
sessions.

In comparisons with the mike feed, the DSD to me was
identical.
Both the PCM and analog were different from the live
feed, but listeners preferred the analog tape,
particularly in the sound of strings.

The SACD we released has versions of the concerto mastered
from DSD and from analog tape transcribed both to DSD and
16-bit PCM, as well as a CD layer transcribed from DSD and
analog. It should answer some questions. We have very few
left
in stock, but I will happily send Jenn one to audition.


Two words: sighted evaluation.

One word: invalid


Unless of course it is A Krueger evaluaating Meitner at the exhibition.
Ludovic M.



  #616   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


Steven Sullivan wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com


In audio the pursuit of excellence is represented not
by the RAO noisemakers but by the truly
outstanding and original designers like D'Agostino and
Meitner who both stated that they are striving to equal
the analogue level in their digital
designs (see the "Stereophile" interviews with them in
2004)


I heard equipment that was attributed to Meitner at HE2005. The good news is
that it was SS and digital and not vinyl or tubes, but there was nothing
exceptionally good-sounding about it.


Bottom line, Sackman is being blinded by the hype.



Mr. Sullivan contributes:
Then of course there's guys liek Dan Lavry
who are at least the equal of Meitner and
D'Agostino as makers of gear, but who haven't quaffed the
analog kool-aid .


Interesting. The real audio designers hold contrasting opinions.
But here I'm told that the issue has bee settled once for all- digital
rules .
Life is hard on RAO. Whom to believe? Meitner or Lavry (whoever he is)?
Sullivan or Krueger?.
Ludovic Mirabel
--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)


  #617   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
: "Jenn" wrote in message
:
:
: But Arny, you said that it's easy for CDs to present
: perfect frequency matching, perfect timbres, perfectly
: super attention to detail, perfect dynamic nuance, and
: perfect spacial cues.
:
: Given your monumental ignorance of what recording is all about Jenn, you've
: forgotten about the most important thing:
:
: A prefect audio signal to record that perfectly represents the sound of live
: music.
:
: There tain't no such thing, nowhere in the known universe.
:
correct.
no such thing as a prefect audio signal
LOUHLi2k6
library of universe,
head librarian
2006


  #618   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Robert Morein" wrote in message
.. .
"John Atkinson" wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com
its unlikely that they, like say John Curl or
John Atkinson will ever in their lives do a proper
listening test to confirm their beliefs.

A Freudian (or should I say "Nousaineian") slip of Mr.
Krueger's pen :-) One does't do test to "confirm" one's
beliefs, one does them to find out whether a phenomenon
is audible.

Usual...hair-splitting noted.


I snipped your usual name-calling, Mr. Krueger. And no, this is
not hair-splitting. Scientific method demands an agnostic attitude
on the part of the experimenter when he both designs and performs
the test. Otherwise the _tester's_ bias affects the results.


This is nonsense. Humans always have tester's bias. The important thing
is
for the scientist to design a methodology that neutralizes this bias
during
the experiment. Arny's tests accomplish this. If your hypothesis was
correct no science would ever be validly performed.

Bob




--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  #619   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

In article ,
"Ruud Broens" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
: In article ,
: Steven Sullivan wrote:
:
: Jenn wrote:
: Sure. The ability to perfectly replicate the sound of an actual
: instrument requires perfect frequency matching, perfect timbre, super
: attention to detail (the ability to hear the bow on the string, for
: example), perfect dynamic nuance, and perfect spacial cues. That's
: just
: a start.
:
: But alas there's no evidence that modern recording can't capture all of
: those
: completely, except for spatial cues.
:
: I see what you mean. But I'm confident that in any reasonable test, I
: could tell the actual violin playing from any recording 100% of the
: time, and I think that more than just spatial cues must come into play.

I'd be interested to know what you'd think of the "best possible"
reproduction, something like a live feed from a pair of AKG CK62 capsules,
amplified and played through a Stax headphone set - how close a call
that is ? Maybe if you come around some studio in the near fu.. ?

Rudy


Thanks for the polite question. I can't imagine not being able to tell
the difference between anything coming out of a speaker and an actual
instrument.
  #620   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

In article .com,
"John Atkinson" wrote:

asked of Arny Krueger:
MINe 109 asked of Arny Krueger:
given the imperfections of recording, mastering and the cd
medium, what cds would you say do a good job of preserving
the massed string sound of an orchestra?


I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity without an
ulterior motive. I know less than little about electronic technology.
I'm told that cd is perfect at reproducing the digital master.
Is the digital master better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


I did such a comparison when I produced the Mozart recording
reported on at
http://www.stereophile.com/musicrecordings/804k622/.
We were recording the clarinet and orchestra using a DSD recorder
(for SACD release), analog tape at 15ips with Dolby-A noise reduction,
and with a 16-bit/44.1k PCM recorder to make CD-Rs for me to take
with me after the sessions.

In comparisons with the mike feed, the DSD to me was identical.
Both the PCM and analog were different from the live feed, but
listeners preferred the analog tape, particularly in the sound of
strings.

The SACD we released has versions of the concerto mastered
from DSD and from analog tape transcribed both to DSD and
16-bit PCM, as well as a CD layer transcribed from DSD and
analog. It should answer some questions. We have very few left
in stock, but I will happily send Jenn one to audition.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


John, I'd love to hear this, and I thank you for your generous offer.
I'll email you my address. And please do let me know the cost.


  #621   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
oups.com
asked of Arny Krueger:
MINe 109 asked of Arny Krueger:
given the imperfections of recording, mastering and the
cd medium, what cds would you say do a good job of
preserving the massed string sound of an orchestra?

I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity without an
ulterior motive. I know less than little about
electronic technology. I'm told that cd is perfect at
reproducing the digital master. Is the digital master
better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


I did such a comparison when I produced the Mozart
recording
reported on at
http://www.stereophile.com/musicrecordings/804k622/. We
were recording the clarinet and orchestra using a DSD
recorder (for SACD release), analog tape at 15ips with
Dolby-A noise reduction, and with a 16-bit/44.1k PCM
recorder to make CD-Rs for me to take with me after the
sessions.

In comparisons with the mike feed, the DSD to me was
identical.
Both the PCM and analog were different from the live
feed, but listeners preferred the analog tape,
particularly in the sound of strings.

The SACD we released has versions of the concerto mastered
from DSD and from analog tape transcribed both to DSD and
16-bit PCM, as well as a CD layer transcribed from DSD and
analog. It should answer some questions. We have very few
left
in stock, but I will happily send Jenn one to audition.


Two words: sighted evaluation.


Why?

One word: invalid


True, as I would be pulling for the pure digital to have the best sound.
  #622   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

"Ruud Broens" wrote in message



I'd be interested to know what you'd think of the "best
possible" reproduction, something like a live feed from a
pair of AKG CK62 capsules, amplified and played through a
Stax headphone set - how close a call
that is ?


If you want to do something like this, you have to do it *right* or you will
have misleading results.

There's only about one way to do this right, and that is to mount the mics
on a real or artificial head, preferably one that duplicates the head of the
listener. The reason for this relates to HRTFs.

If you do this *right* the mics don't have to be exotic or expensive.
Panasonic's low-cost omni electrets can provide very convincing results if
the SPLs are reasonably high.

OTOH Rudy if you fail to recognize that this is about binaural listening,
which you have done above, you will never get really convincing results.

Once you do this experiment right and deal with listener bias, you might be
amazed at how humble the electronics link between the mics and the earphones
can be for convincing results. If the link is digital, it doesn't even have
to be all that wonderful - even MD can do.



  #623   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

"John Atkinson" wrote
in message
ups.com

Scientific method demands an agnostic
attitude on the part of the experimenter when he both
designs and performs the test.


This is a very strange statement coming from a person who has made a career
out of organizing biased tests.

Otherwise the _tester's_ bias affects the results.


Is this supposed to be some kind of a news flash?

LOL!

If only you could hear and properly perceive your own voice, John!

Both Tom Nousaine's and Howard
Ferstler's published blind tests have
suffered from this problem.


Just about every evaluation published in Stereophile, including a few that
were mislabled "blind" have suffered from this problem.

*Doctor* Atkinson, cure thyself!


You would need to start redoing your life no later than that lame anecdote
you started the HE2005 debate out with.


  #624   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
: "Ruud Broens" wrote in message
:
:
:
: I'd be interested to know what you'd think of the "best
: possible" reproduction, something like a live feed from a
: pair of AKG CK62 capsules, amplified and played through a
: Stax headphone set - how close a call
: that is ?
:
: If you want to do something like this, you have to do it *right* or you will
: have misleading results.
:
: There's only about one way to do this right, and that is to mount the mics
: on a real or artificial head, preferably one that duplicates the head of the
: listener. The reason for this relates to HRTFs.
:
err, dunno about the real head :0)
the capsules i mentioned are ruler flat to 30 KHz, perfect omni -
why start with anything less ?

: If you do this *right* the mics don't have to be exotic or expensive.
: Panasonic's low-cost omni electrets can provide very convincing results if
: the SPLs are reasonably high.
:
: OTOH Rudy if you fail to recognize that this is about binaural listening,
: which you have done above, you will never get really convincing results.
:
err, dunno about that
you better draw me a logic scheme for that..

let's stick with an artificial head,
agreed
Rudy

: Once you do this experiment right and deal with listener bias, you might be
: amazed at how humble the electronics link between the mics and the earphones
: can be for convincing results. If the link is digital, it doesn't even have
: to be all that wonderful - even MD can do.
:
:
:


  #625   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...

: ? There's no reason for there to be *audible* artifacts from a good
: digital recording or transfer. This doesn't mean some bad recordings haven't
been
: made!
:
: --
: -SSS
: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)

good example of Science - Sullivan Style - :
sweeping generalisations and narrow bandpass of knowledge
now could we have some quantification for that 'science veneer',
to finish it off, mr Sullivan ?

garbage collector routine
running..
R.




  #626   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

John Atkinson wrote:

asked of Arny Krueger:
MINe 109 asked of Arny Krueger:
given the imperfections of recording, mastering and the cd
medium, what cds would you say do a good job of preserving
the massed string sound of an orchestra?


I'm asking for enlightenment in all sincerity without an
ulterior motive. I know less than little about electronic technology.
I'm told that cd is perfect at reproducing the digital master.
Is the digital master better at capturing the live sound than
the analogue master?


I did such a comparison when I produced the Mozart recording
reported on at
http://www.stereophile.com/musicrecordings/804k622/.
We were recording the clarinet and orchestra using a DSD recorder
(for SACD release), analog tape at 15ips with Dolby-A noise reduction,
and with a 16-bit/44.1k PCM recorder to make CD-Rs for me to take
with me after the sessions.


In comparisons with the mike feed, the DSD to me was identical.
Both the PCM and analog were different from the live feed, but
listeners preferred the analog tape, particularly in the sound of
strings.



sigh blind or sighted? And what were the statistics like?

C'mon, having elsewhere on this thread opined on what good science *should be*,
you *must* know how much this matters.




--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)
  #627   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

Ruud Broens wrote:

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...


: ? There's no reason for there to be *audible* artifacts from a good
: digital recording or transfer. This doesn't mean some bad recordings haven't
been
: made!
:
: --
: -SSS
: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)


good example of Science - Sullivan Style - :
sweeping generalisations and narrow bandpass of knowledge
now could we have some quantification for that 'science veneer',
to finish it off, mr Sullivan ?


garbage collector routine
running..
R.


I didn't know you were a *garbologist*, Ruud.

My claim wasn't sweeping -- it was qualified with the words
'audible' and 'good'. If you wish to learn the technical details
of what would constitute 'good' digital transfer -- one that would
not be expected to produce audible artifacts -- I suggest you
read Nika Aldrich's book, 'Digital Audio Explained for the Audio
Engineer'. It treats the topic thoroughly, starting from
the basics of acoustics and the physiology of hearing, up through
the development of DSD.



--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)
  #628   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP


"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
: Ruud Broens wrote:
:
: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
: ...
:
: : ? There's no reason for there to be *audible* artifacts from a good
: : digital recording or transfer. This doesn't mean some bad recordings
haven't
: been
: : made!
: :
: : --
: : -SSS
: : "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison
(1788)
:
: good example of Science - Sullivan Style - :
: sweeping generalisations and narrow bandpass of knowledge
: now could we have some quantification for that 'science veneer',
: to finish it off, mr Sullivan ?
:
: garbage collector routine
: running..
: R.
:
: I didn't know you were a *garbologist*, Ruud.
:
: My claim wasn't sweeping -- it was qualified with the words
: 'audible' and 'good'. If you wish to learn the technical details
: of what would constitute 'good' digital transfer -- one that would
: not be expected to produce audible artifacts -- I suggest you
: read Nika Aldrich's book, 'Digital Audio Explained for the Audio
: Engineer'. It treats the topic thoroughly, starting from
: the basics of acoustics and the physiology of hearing, up through
: the development of DSD.
:
:
I order to expect, one has to know.
for instance, i'd suspect you not to expect
your blood composition to be influenced by sunspot activity
tiz so, though

or, say, the _type of nervecell_ terminating determining the
structural processing hardware that is developed in a brain region
(if we could emulate that, miraculous advances in artificial hearing
and vision await

As mentioned before, until a true multidisciplinary approach is taken,
all the 'blameless, good, etc' claims are suspect.

Rudy


  #629   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Limits of the LP

Ruud Broens wrote:

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
: Ruud Broens wrote:
:
: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
: ...
:
: : ? There's no reason for there to be *audible* artifacts from a good
: : digital recording or transfer. This doesn't mean some bad recordings
haven't
: been
: : made!
: :
: : --
: : -SSS
: : "If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison
(1788)
:
: good example of Science - Sullivan Style - :
: sweeping generalisations and narrow bandpass of knowledge
: now could we have some quantification for that 'science veneer',
: to finish it off, mr Sullivan ?
:
: garbage collector routine
: running..
: R.
:
: I didn't know you were a *garbologist*, Ruud.
:
: My claim wasn't sweeping -- it was qualified with the words
: 'audible' and 'good'. If you wish to learn the technical details
: of what would constitute 'good' digital transfer -- one that would
: not be expected to produce audible artifacts -- I suggest you
: read Nika Aldrich's book, 'Digital Audio Explained for the Audio
: Engineer'. It treats the topic thoroughly, starting from
: the basics of acoustics and the physiology of hearing, up through
: the development of DSD.
:
:


I order to expect, one has to know.


Well, there's 'knowing' things that are true, and 'knowing' things that aren't.

for instance, i'd suspect you not to expect
your blood composition to be influenced by sunspot activity
tiz so, though



And you 'know' this , how?

or, say, the _type of nervecell_ terminating determining the
structural processing hardware that is developed in a brain region
(if we could emulate that, miraculous advances in artificial hearing
and vision await


I've done some work in neuroscience myself, so I think I can
*expect* neuronal architecture to be affected by the neuronal
milieu.


As mentioned before, until a true multidisciplinary approach is taken,
all the 'blameless, good, etc' claims are suspect.



Which disciplines besides psychoacoustics, acoustics, and engineering
do you propose be included to support claims of audible difference?



--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Natural Limits to high frequencies? Sean Conolly Pro Audio 10 July 24th 05 09:26 PM
Interesting article Schizoid Man Audio Opinions 8 December 29th 03 09:51 PM
USB Audio limits? Jack A. Zucker Pro Audio 55 December 22nd 03 09:23 AM
Richman's ethical lapses Michael McKelvy Audio Opinions 9 December 12th 03 09:16 AM
Steve Winwood on Austin City Limits, did anyone [email protected] Pro Audio 5 October 14th 03 05:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"