| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
burning HDCD
Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can
I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? Thank a lot Antani |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Antani" wrote in message
... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years back now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has trickled into the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have not heard much new about HDCD in the recent past. Charles Tomaras Seattle, WA |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Antani" wrote in message ... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs, nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer drive. Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed ..wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will also be HDCD encoded. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message ...
"Antani" wrote in message ... Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. I do not have a HDCD player for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High End burner. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
news:nYDxc.4691$jw.1840@attbi_s04... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Antani" wrote in message ... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs, nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer drive. Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed .wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will also be HDCD encoded. Where does one find computer software to encode HDCD? I'd like a link if you know of something or some plug-in. I was not aware that anything was available. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
TChelvam wrote:
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message ... "Antani" wrote in message ... Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. ? It showed HDCD playback because it was HDCD encoded. Media Playuer 9 can detect and decode HDCD. Microsoft bought the HDCD process some years ago; Media PLayer is about the only place it's likely to survive. Like I said, an HDCD copied digitally, will retain the HDCD encoding. I do not have a HDCD player for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High End burner. Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning software. Your copy should sound identical to the original. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:nYDxc.4691$jw.1840@attbi_s04... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Antani" wrote in message ... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. The NAD is an HDCD-ready CD player. But he doesn't need it to burn HDCDs, nor could he use it to burn one. He can just use a standard computer drive. Ripping an HDCD to hard disc as a set of uncompressed .wav file will preserve the encoding. A CDR burned from such .wavs will also be HDCD encoded. Where does one find computer software to encode HDCD? I'd like a link if you know of something or some plug-in. I was not aware that anything was available. There are none that I know of. You can't encode something in HDCD. You can only preserve and copy the HDCD encoding of something that's already HDCD. (You can also destroy the encoding, by converting the .wav to mp3 or other lossy compressed format). Pretty much *ANY* CDRW drive and any disc ripping/burnign software that saves the rip as .wav, will preserve the HDCD encoding of an HDCD disc. (I presume a disc image will also work, though I haven't tried that). -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"TChelvam" wrote in message
... "Charles Tomaras" wrote in message ... "Antani" wrote in message ... Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. I did burn one HDCD using NERO. The copy when played using Window media Player 9, it showed HDCD playback. I doubt this is accurate but I just do not why it showed HDCD playback. I do not have a HDCD player for verifying. Anyway the sound was horrible unlike the original. I think it cheaper to buy your second CD rather than investing in High End burner. So I think you are saying that you "copied" an existing HDCD disc not that you HDCD encoded existing 20 or 24 bit wav files. As far as I know there aren't any mainstream computer encoding applications that do the HDCD processing/encoding. Charles Tomaras |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Antani" wrote in message ... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years back now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has trickled into the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have not heard much new about HDCD in the recent past. Charles Tomaras Seattle, WA Why? HDCD is a dead format walking. Why not DVD audio? CD |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"codifus" wrote in message
... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Antani" wrote in message ... Hi, I just bought a NAD c541i, including HDCD chip. I'd like to know how can I burn an HDCD. Do I have to use normal cd? http://www.hdcd.com/partners/proaudio/index.html Standalone HDCD encoders are expensive little beasts and I'm not aware of any computer software that is available to encode. Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and HDCD technology a few years back now and I would imagine that a portion of that technology has trickled into the WM codecs and encoders but I can't say for sure. I have not heard much new about HDCD in the recent past. Charles Tomaras Seattle, WA Why? HDCD is a dead format walking. Why not DVD audio? CD Exactly my feelings. I imagine Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics for the code base and mind power they had. It certainly was not to actively push HDCD. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01...
Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning software. Your copy should sound identical to the original. Not so. It depends how good is your writer. Compared the spcetrogram in Nero wave editor and the difference is obvious. though in my PC both original and copy sounded the same. But I don't expect much out of a $30 CD writer. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"TChelvam" wrote in message
news:qCiyc.32150$Sw.26530@attbi_s51... Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01... Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning software. Your copy should sound identical to the original. Not so. It depends how good is your writer. Compared the spcetrogram in Nero wave editor and the difference is obvious. though in my PC both original and copy sounded the same. But I don't expect much out of a $30 CD writer. If you had gone to the expense to use the BLACK CD blanks you would have been far happier!  |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
TChelvam wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:bBZxc.76626$Ly.57011@attbi_s01... Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. If you used Nero I assume you did the ripping/burning on a computer disc CDRW drive, with Nero as the ripping/burning software. Your copy should sound identical to the original. Not so. It depends how good is your writer. Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Apparently, everything is different, your CDR, whether black or blue and etc. so my golden ears was right when something was not quite right. Read this interesting article by John Vestman -engineer/producer/studio owner for 27 years. http://www.johnvestman.com/digital_myth.htm Judge for yourself... |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Chelvam wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Apparently, everything is different, your CDR, whether black or blue and etc. so my golden ears was right when something was not quite right. Read this interesting article by John Vestman -engineer/producer/studio owner for 27 years. http://www.johnvestman.com/digital_myth.htm Judge for yourself... I tried to judge by myself and examined the extracted wave files with CoolEditPro2000: 1.) I ripped with EAC and the "speed" setting the 7th track from the original CD. It was read at an average of 27.6 times 2.) I ripped now the same track with the "exact" setting from the original CD. The ripping rate was 7.4 times. 3.) I had copied the CD to CDR (black dye) with nero in the "copy disk" mode some days ago. Ripped again "exact" with EAC. The speed was 5.8 times. Now I opened version1.) and copied it into the clipboard. Then I went to version 2.) and with Edit\mix paste\ and invert I subtracted both versions. Both were absolutely identical, not a single bit was different. The length of this piece was around 12.5 Mio samples. Then I tried the same with version 3.), but I got even bigger volume than the original. Examining both files I found them to have a slightly different length 12855444 vs. 12767244 samples. I zoomed into the beginning and found the first value different from zero to be sample 9378 vs. 9481. So I selected only from this value with a length of 10000000 samples and subtracted again: Absolutely identical, not a single sample was different. What differed was the number of 0-samples at the beginning and end. So the time indication can be a little off, but the CDR was apparently identical, at least for this track. There cannot simply be any different sounding dye or whatever unless the batch is faulty. Whatever urban myth is spread to use only this or that brand, as long as the copy is identical, as was mine they will sound the same. This website is a typical example of invented crap. I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an email. ciao Ban Bordighera, Italy |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Chelvam wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Don't know what to tell you except -- I can generate verifiably bit-perfect copies of digital tracks, using EAC, in a matter of minutes. Apparently, everything is different, your CDR, whether black or blue and etc. so my golden ears was right when something was not quite right. LLike many claims in audiophilia, it may be 'apparent' but it has precious little in the way of objective verification. Read this interesting article by John Vestman -engineer/producer/studio owner for 27 years. http://www.johnvestman.com/digital_myth.htm Judge for yourself... Being am engineer/prodice/studio owner has never, alas, prevented anyone from making unsubstantiated claims about audio, or to have dearly-held personal superstitions. Typically, Mr. Vestman hasn't provided anything except purely anecdotal evidence for his claims. His refutaiton of the 'placebo' effec tis laughable. He does, at least, acknowledge that his claims are 'controversial'. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:splAc.64833$0y.23491@attbi_s03...
Chelvam wrote: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Don't know what to tell you except -- I can generate verifiably bit-perfect copies of digital tracks, using EAC, in a matter of minutes. Yes, agreed but to say the quality of writer is immaterial is bit unrealistic. Even the Nero knowledge base/ manuals recommend good writer for copying audio CD. I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results. If you are right I accept that without any qualm/ |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Hear hear! If you can't do an exact copy of a CD, then it's time to buy a
new burner. keithw... "Ban" wrote in message news:51kAc.65433$HG.50568@attbi_s53... Chelvam wrote: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Apparently, everything is different, your CDR, whether black or blue and etc. so my golden ears was right when something was not quite right. Read this interesting article by John Vestman -engineer/producer/studio owner for 27 years. http://www.johnvestman.com/digital_myth.htm Judge for yourself... I tried to judge by myself and examined the extracted wave files with CoolEditPro2000: 1.) I ripped with EAC and the "speed" setting the 7th track from the original CD. It was read at an average of 27.6 times 2.) I ripped now the same track with the "exact" setting from the original CD. The ripping rate was 7.4 times. 3.) I had copied the CD to CDR (black dye) with nero in the "copy disk" mode some days ago. Ripped again "exact" with EAC. The speed was 5.8 times. Now I opened version1.) and copied it into the clipboard. Then I went to version 2.) and with Edit\mix paste\ and invert I subtracted both versions. Both were absolutely identical, not a single bit was different. The length of this piece was around 12.5 Mio samples. Then I tried the same with version 3.), but I got even bigger volume than the original. Examining both files I found them to have a slightly different length 12855444 vs. 12767244 samples. I zoomed into the beginning and found the first value different from zero to be sample 9378 vs. 9481. So I selected only from this value with a length of 10000000 samples and subtracted again: Absolutely identical, not a single sample was different. What differed was the number of 0-samples at the beginning and end. So the time indication can be a little off, but the CDR was apparently identical, at least for this track. There cannot simply be any different sounding dye or whatever unless the batch is faulty. Whatever urban myth is spread to use only this or that brand, as long as the copy is identical, as was mine they will sound the same. This website is a typical example of invented crap. I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an email. ciao Ban Bordighera, Italy |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Ban" wrote in message news:51kAc.65433$HG.50568@attbi_s53...
Chelvam wrote: I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an email. Maybe the urban myth is more than what I bargain for to support my earlier assertation that to make a perfect copy you need a good hardware (CD writer). On the color of CDR, I know nothing about it since I have only burned 3 audio CD and did not like the quality. I find it bit hard to believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the same. But I agree with you that you can make perfect copies. Cheers. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
TChelvam wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote in message news:splAc.64833$0y.23491@attbi_s03... Chelvam wrote: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message news:_Xvyc.20896$0y.12072@attbi_s03... Your copy *should* sound identical to the original. If it doesn't, there's something deficient about your setup. Bit-perfect duplication of CD tracks is pretty easy to achieve these days. No again. Don't know what to tell you except -- I can generate verifiably bit-perfect copies of digital tracks, using EAC, in a matter of minutes. Yes, agreed but to say the quality of writer is immaterial is bit unrealistic. Even the Nero knowledge base/ manuals recommend good writer for copying audio CD. I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was something awry with your CD burning setup. I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results. If you are right I accept that without any qualm/ Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault? -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
TChelvam wrote:
"Ban" wrote in message news:51kAc.65433$HG.50568@attbi_s53... Chelvam wrote: I suggest anyone doubting my survey to execute it oneself and see. I can be helpful if you have problems operating the editing software, drop me an email. Maybe the urban myth is more than what I bargain for to support my earlier assertation that to make a perfect copy you need a good hardware (CD writer). On the color of CDR, I know nothing about it since I have only burned 3 audio CD and did not like the quality. I find it bit hard to believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the same. That $30 drive might have cost $200 two years ago. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
chung wrote:
That $30 drive might have cost $200 two years ago. I used an Aopen CRW5232 burner costing 32Euros now. I bought it on Xmas for 45Euros. Great drive lets you grab audio-cds at 27times average without the slightest error and all the CDRs I burn 52 times, just 150seconds for a copy. I made a few more checks in the meantime with the same results: Could not find a single bit error up to now. I also checked disks burnt on my other 2 drives and they are also identical. So the technology seemingly has pretty much arrived at perfection. -- ciao Ban Bordighera, Italy |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
... I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was something awry with your CD burning setup. I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results. If you are right I accept that without any qualm/ Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault? Writing this with my tail between my legs. 1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice. 2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the write speed to the lowest. 3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD. 4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes. 5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and copy. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Chelvam wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was something awry with your CD burning setup. I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results. If you are right I accept that without any qualm/ Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault? Writing this with my tail between my legs. 1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice. 2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the write speed to the lowest. 3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD. 4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes. That has more to do with the CD blank than the player, I think. Some older blank CD-R's are optimized for slow-speed writing, while the new blanks are optimized for high-speed writing. 5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and copy. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Chelvam wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... I never said the quality of the CD writer was immaterial. I did say it was a trivial matter to make bit-perfect copies these days. I also soaid that if your copies sounded different from your originals, then there was something awry with your CD burning setup. I will be getting a better writer soon and I can tell you the results. If you are right I accept that without any qualm/ Have you determined that your writer is, in fact, at fault? Writing this with my tail between my legs. 1. Apparently my Cd Burner is one of the popular choice. What burner is this? 2. After some tips from other forum, I reduced the write speed to the lowest. 3. took me 16 minutes to burn one 59 minutes CD. That's pretty slow...and shouldn't be necessary. 4. Previously, it took me about 4 minutes. 15X is prett good but 40X is easily doable these days. 5. It sounded great that I can't tell the different between the original and copy. If I were you, I'd checkto ensure that other parameters of your computer setup were optimized. You shouldn't have to burn at ~4x to get perfect copies unless your system is rather outdated. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"TChelvam" wrote in message I find it bit hard to
believe that a $200 CD writer and $30 are the same. But I agree with you that you can make perfect copies. I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Charles Tomaras wrote:
I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Two possibilities: 1) You haven't trained your taste buds. 2) Your butter knife doesn't have enough resolution. bob __________________________________________________ _______________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/...ave/direct/01/ |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Bob Marcus" wrote in message
news:QLjBc.84484$0y.69748@attbi_s03... Charles Tomaras wrote: I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Two possibilities: 1) You haven't trained your taste buds. 2) Your butter knife doesn't have enough resolution. That's pure garbage Bob. I took three different butter knives down to the Seattle Culinary Institute and performed blindfold testing with them and not only could they not differentiate between them, one of the master chefs actually chose the tin alloy knife over sterling silver. (I must preface these results slightly because the testing was flawed by the fact that we ran out of whole grain bread half way through and had to switch to a Smokey Russian Rye) |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Bob Marcus wrote:
Charles Tomaras wrote: I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Two possibilities: 1) You haven't trained your taste buds. 2) Your butter knife doesn't have enough resolution. bob 3rd possibility: Test was was not done in an open-ended, evaluative mode  |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Bob Marcus" wrote in message news:QLjBc.84484$0y.69748@attbi_s03... Charles Tomaras wrote: I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Two possibilities: 1) You haven't trained your taste buds. 2) Your butter knife doesn't have enough resolution. That's pure garbage Bob. I took three different butter knives down to the Seattle Culinary Institute and performed blindfold testing with them and not only could they not differentiate between them, one of the master chefs actually chose the tin alloy knife over sterling silver. (I must preface these results slightly because the testing was flawed by the fact that we ran out of whole grain bread half way through and had to switch to a Smokey Russian Rye) THe test is invalid. You haven't proved that a blindfold test doesn't interfere with the existential purity of the sterling silver experience. Nor have you told us whether even your wife can tell the difference. -- -S. Why don't you just admit that you hate music and leave people alone. -- spiffy |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
On 6/20/04 3:28 PM, in article %zlBc.65702$Hg2.8121@attbi_s04, "chung"
wrote: Bob Marcus wrote: Charles Tomaras wrote: I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Two possibilities: 1) You haven't trained your taste buds. 2) Your butter knife doesn't have enough resolution. bob 3rd possibility: Test was was not done in an open-ended, evaluative mode 4th possibility: No one doing the test likes toast! ;-P |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
|
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message
I've got a $200 toaster oven and a $20 dual slice toaster and nobody can taste a difference in the toast. Nobody means only you?. you need independant participants. Firstly, toasts are directional. You need to start from the side that popped out first. Otherwise, you getting it wrong. Also, the tougue need to be cleaned to have better contact between the toast and tongue. |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"S888Wheel" wrote in message news:2hpBc.151404 I guess
some folks think toasters and toaster ovens actually toast bread exactly the same way. If you believe that all you really need to be a gourmet cook is a microwave oven. Cooked food is cooked food. The truth be told...the $20 toaster does a better job of making toast than the $200 toaster oven. |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
|
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
|
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
"Charles Tomaras" wrote in message ...
"S888Wheel" wrote in message news:2hpBc.151404 I guess some folks think toasters and toaster ovens actually toast bread exactly the same way. If you believe that all you really need to be a gourmet cook is a microwave oven. Cooked food is cooked food. The truth be told...the $20 toaster does a better job of making toast than the $200 toaster oven. So can tell the difference or not? You are contradicting yourself. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
burning HDCD
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Frequency Responce HDCD vs SACD vs DVDA | High End Audio | |||
| Pioneer DV-563A HDCD compatibility | High End Audio | |||
| So. Cal Burning | Audio Opinions | |||
| HDCD: necessary or not? | Audio Opinions | |||
| HDCD: necessary or not? | General | |||
Linear Mode
