[Edmund[_2_]]

Hi All,

I find it very strange but I heard differences between different SACD
players. I would think that the specs of SACD players are way above
anything I could hear and therefore I did expect to hear any differences
at all.

Now I am curious about others, does any of you have a similar experience
and what was the best player you have heard?

Edmund

[Arny Krueger]

"Edmund" wrote in message


I find it very strange but I heard differences between
different SACD players. I would think that the specs of
SACD players are way above anything I could hear and
therefore I did expect to hear any differences at all.

Sighted, non level matched, non time synched evaluation, right?

If you listen to different music at different sound levels, it will of
course sound different. If it doesn't, something is sooo wrong. ;-)

99% of all audiophile so-called listening tests are done this way. They are
thus pretty much meaningless, if the area of discussion is technical
performance.

Now I am curious about others, does any of you have a
similar experience and what was the best player you have
heard?

All the good ones pretty much sound the same. SACD is an interesting
technical spec. Yes, there's more than enough bandwidth and dynamic range.
But the same is true of the original CD spec. I think that if you ever did a
listening test with truly matched levels and truly time-synchronized music,
you will probably have an epiphany. Add in good bias controls, and just
about everybody is totally lost when it comes to hearing differences among
even moderately good players.

IOW you are right. Paraphrasing what you wrote, you should think that the
specs of good SACD (and CD) players are way above anything anybody can hear.
Therefore nobody should expect to hear any differences at all. However, hope
springs eternal. Many have tried to disprove it, and everybody to date has
failed.

[Peter]

"Arny Krueger" wrote

IOW you are right. Paraphrasing what you wrote, you should think that the
specs of good SACD (and CD) players are way above anything anybody can
hear.
Therefore nobody should expect to hear any differences at all. However,
hope
springs eternal. Many have tried to disprove it, and everybody to date has
failed.

But yet there certainly seem to be audible differences between various CD
players, and even within the same CD players when for instance the
upsampling rate is user variable.

Furthermore I do believe that every CD player manufacturer ultimately
"tunes" the output of their equipment to how THEY feel it sounds best, and
surely this can lead to audible differences between various CD players.

[Edmund[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" schreef in bericht
...
"Edmund" wrote in message


I find it very strange but I heard differences between
different SACD players. I would think that the specs of
SACD players are way above anything I could hear and
therefore I did expect to hear any differences at all.

Sighted, non level matched, non time synched evaluation, right?

Right! :-) This is always the case to get a first impression for all my
audio gear.

If you listen to different music at different sound levels, it will of
course sound different. If it doesn't, something is sooo wrong. ;-)

One installation with two SACD players and the same SACD.

99% of all audiophile so-called listening tests are done this way. They
are
thus pretty much meaningless, if the area of discussion is technical
performance.

Now I am curious about others, does any of you have a
similar experience and what was the best player you have
heard?

All the good ones pretty much sound the same. SACD is an interesting
technical spec. Yes, there's more than enough bandwidth and dynamic range.
But the same is true of the original CD spec. I think that if you ever did
a
listening test with truly matched levels and truly time-synchronized
music,
you will probably have an epiphany. Add in good bias controls, and just
about everybody is totally lost when it comes to hearing differences among
even moderately good players.

I read some interesting stuff about the CD format with simulations of
signals
and the CD format doesn't seem so perfect at all.
But the SACD should be so much better, strange that - I have the
impression -
one sounds better then the other. I even wonder if one brand is cheating
somehow.


IOW you are right. Paraphrasing what you wrote, you should think that the
specs of good SACD (and CD) players are way above anything anybody can
hear.
Therefore nobody should expect to hear any differences at all. However,
hope
springs eternal. Many have tried to disprove it, and everybody to date has
failed.

I know, interesting I heard some people in the AES are suggesting another
SACD vs CD test with speakers and amplifiers that should be able to
make the differences audible. I hope they will do this test I am very
curious about the outcome.

Edmund

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote

IOW you are right. Paraphrasing what you wrote, you
should think that the specs of good SACD (and CD) players
are way above anything anybody can hear.
Therefore nobody should expect to hear any differences at
all. However, hope
springs eternal. Many have tried to disprove it, and
everybody to date has failed.

But yet there certainly seem to be audible differences
between various CD players, and even within the same CD
players when for instance the upsampling rate is user
variable.

Take what we know about audibility of frequency response variations from the
psychoacoustics guys and compare that to the actual measured performance of
even medium-priced CD/DVD players. You'll come up with not so much, or even
less.

Furthermore I do believe that every CD player
manufacturer ultimately "tunes" the output of their
equipment to how THEY feel it sounds best, and surely
this can lead to audible differences between various CD
players.

The measured performance of good CD/DVD players leaves no room for that sort
of finagling.

[Dick Pierce[_2_]]

Peter wrote:
But yet there certainly seem to be audible differences between various CD
players, and even within the same CD players when for instance the
upsampling rate is user variable.

A theoretically perfect resampling algorithm will add or subtract
absolutely nothing from the original signal: the output signal
from an upsampler would be IDENTICAL to the input signal.

UNLESS, of course, if the upsampling algorithm were broken or
deliberately written to add information that was not originally
present in the signal. And, unless there was extra information in
the signal that told the algorithm what information waa missing,
whatever missing incormation it added must be distortion of one
type or another. But, of course, the information that tells us
what information is missing is, well, missing.

Certainly there's no accounting for those manufacturers that
either inadvertantly or deliberately degrade the outputs to
suit one agenda or another. Unfortunately, in the high-end
audio realm, this is not uncommon: what is a clear defect
is promoted as an obvious benefit.

Some might claim that upsampling makes the output waveform
smoother. That claim, in DSP terms, is horsepoop.

Check out the following:

http://www.mlssa.com/pdf/Upsampling-theory-rev-2.pdf

Furthermore I do believe that every CD player manufacturer ultimately
"tunes" the output of their equipment to how THEY feel it sounds best, and
surely this can lead to audible differences between various CD players.

You may "believe" this but where's the physical evidence? Take the top
off a bunch of CD players: see how much of the internal guts are not
only similar, but identical. Measure the output of each. Compare the
output of each so as to eliminate all other variables EXCEPT the output
of each.

Your claim is "EVERY manufacturer" tunes the output of their equipment.
That's something of an extraordinary claim. Where's the extraordinary
proof?

--
+--------------------------------+
+ Dick Pierce |
+ Professional Audio Development |
+--------------------------------+

[Sonnova]

On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 05:53:30 -0700, Peter wrote
(in article ):

"Arny Krueger" wrote

IOW you are right. Paraphrasing what you wrote, you should think that the
specs of good SACD (and CD) players are way above anything anybody can
hear.
Therefore nobody should expect to hear any differences at all. However,
hope
springs eternal. Many have tried to disprove it, and everybody to date has
failed.

But yet there certainly seem to be audible differences between various CD
players, and even within the same CD players when for instance the
upsampling rate is user variable.

Furthermore I do believe that every CD player manufacturer ultimately
"tunes" the output of their equipment to how THEY feel it sounds best, and
surely this can lead to audible differences between various CD players.

Sure, anything with "filters" in the audio circuitry is subject to somebody's
ideas about how those filters should act upon the signal. My Sony XA777ES
SACD player, for instance, has several different listener selectable filter
"curves" for RedBook CD playback. They all sound slightly different.