pmr@drufl.UUCP (Rastocny) (01/16/84)
rabbit!jj, Now for some flaming in a place where it should be kept. First, I'd like to say that some of the things you've said about me are wrong, totally misquoted, and taken out of context. I think you've misunderstood me from the start. I may appear to be inconsistent and illogical to you, but you seem to be the only one who has this opinion. It seems like you don't even bother to read the entire article before you break out and write a nasty followup. Aside from you constantly misquoting and misinterpreting what I've said, I have no quarrel with you. Escept your inferences that subjectivity having no place, however, in the audioplace I feel is a crock. Tell me that each time you replace a component in YOUR system that you can't hear a difference (preamp, amp, cartridge, arm, or turntable). Swapping components in a system that you are intametly familiar with the sound is only one place to demonstrate subjective observations. Tell me what type of reference equipment your listening through. I'm not saying that you're not expressing the truth when you make your comments, just that you've probably never heard a state-of-the-art analog system and cannot make a just comparison. Have you ever listened to anything better than Hafler electronics, Shure cartridges, Thorens tables, and Acoustic Research loudspeakers? Digital systems win hands down in several spec areas (and by the way I never said that they were better than 78s): s/n, dynamic range, and THD/IMD. Fine. But digital players, like the Sony CDP-101 and the Hitachi DA-1000, still sound like s*** no matter what you say. I've been picking on phase because that's the only spec I can see that is not consistant with the original signal. I don't care what phono cartridges and RIAA networks do to the phase on analog systems, we're not talking specs, we're talking sonic accuracy. If it's not phase differnces that I (and about 30 other people that I know hear this problem, including the National Sales Representative of Denon) then what is it? Have you ever listened to these systems seriously? From what I've hears, CDs are OK. They will probably evolve their sonic quality just as cassettes did through their history. (I know, it's another format but the sonic quality did get a lot better. That was the point, not that cassettes are better than CDs. They're not.) When I first heard a Sony Walkman, I thought it sounded pretty good, until I really listened to it. Then I began to hear its shortcomings. Are you being fooled by CDs novelty? By its utter quiet? By the dynamics? (I know that you cannot hear distortion differnces. You've said it yourself that you can't hear distortion under 0.5%. Or are you going to change your mind "conveniently" as you said [unjustifiably] that I have.) Come on now. Flame away and make my day. It just bugges the H*** out of me when loud mouths like yourself spit out all this technical bull and then say that they've "read" that you can't hear differences in CDs (Stereo Review, et.al.) but never taken the time to see if you actually could hear differnces yourself. If there are no differences, then why do the British magazines and a few national mags who don't rely on advertising for their income hate the CD system? Most of the specs given with electronic gear you cannot relate to the sound. I (and many others) CAN hear differences between two equivalent-spec amplifiers, just as I said I could. Now, which sounds more accurate is another whole dissertation. FLAME here, not on net.audio -- or do you think you're above the net guidelines too? Do you also walk on water? Phil Rastocny
jj@rabbit.UUCP (02/01/84)
Well, Phil, you aren't quite listening... I do think subjectivity has a place in the audio market. I also have managed, over the years, to be able to spot the "differences" while listening and then, from what I've heard, find out WHAT THEY WERE. (It's nice to be able to establish a correlation between subjective and objective measures once in a while! Not too easy, either!) I've heard a lot of crap on CD's that is clearly, distinctly, etc, the results of GAWDAWFUL MIKING TECHNIQUES. I've also heard a couple of the worst mixes known to mankind. I don't blame EITHER of these on the digital technology, and I don't think the disc is inferior to other forms of digital recording, especially since it's BLOODY WELL IDENTICAL. You hear me? IDENTICAL. There are, naturally, a few bad implementations. These bad implementations do not predominate, however , in fact they are barely in the market. A lot of what you've been arguing just doesn't stand up from the end of digital analysis/theory/practice/experience, in which I currently earn my living. Some of the results you've been hearing certainly exist, but they almost uniformly don't have anything to do with digital audio. A few may, but it' hard to sift through everything. <Note comments on dithering, etc> I also have an interesting test for you: Take a digital signal. Take a pair of UNCONNECTED pink noise generators, and add a bit of pink noise about 75dB down to the digital signal. Presto! Ambience! <Try it, Phil, TRY IT> It's embarressed a LOT of people! Digital does indeed sound different sometimes. It's not always WRONG, though. Just remember that one have learned to tolerate certain changes in sound from the disc process, and that they now sound "normal" to one's self. Perhaps you might give youself a chance to acclimitize a bit more, including, perhaps, a change in the system setup that has been mitigating the analog distorions, to the detrement of the digital signal, which has different problems. Frankly, I don't want to argue with you, I'm tired of flaming, and I'm even more tired of trying to deal with misinformation and superstition. <You aren't even NEAR the top of my complaint list, by the way, but you DO write a lot of articles.> If you think I'm attacking you, go read net.politics and find see what you think afterwards. I certainly disagree with you, but I'm not attacking you. Let's keep it that way. -- TEDDY BEARS ARE PEOPLE, TOO! (allegra,harpo,ulysses)!rabbit!jj
karn@allegra.UUCP (02/02/84)
Regarding the "phase shift" complaint in CDs....again... THIS IS AN UTTER RED HERRING!!!!! The only people who complain about the "inherent CD player phase shift problem" are those who a) haven't looked at many CD player lab tests b) don't know the first thing about signal theory, and c) can't find any other term to latch onto to give their vague complaints some pseudo-scientific credibility. Take a look at the square wave and impulse response tests of the various CD players. For example, the Marantz player reviewed in the current issue of Audio. Notice the ripples on each side of the impulse or square wave edge. See how they're nice and symmetrical? This, BY DEFINITION, indicates linear phase, and many of the CD scope photos I've seen are practically textbook examples! The existence of the ripples in the first place is an inescapable result of the sharp (i.e., nearly ideal) AMPLITUDE response cutoff. Only if these ripples were asymmetrical would they indicate phase nonlinearity, in which different signal frequencies encounter differing delays in arriving at the output terminals. Now it is true that SOME CD player manufacturers have elected to simplify the design by using filters that do not provide linear phase. It is still doubtful that ANYONE can hear the difference at the high frequencies involved, but even if some could it is totally wrong to claim that "phase shift" is an inherent and unacceptable problem with ALL CD players. The fact that people are fighting major wars over such insignificant squabbles indicates just how close to perfection CD players really are. Phil Karn
pmr@drufl.UUCP (Rastocny) (02/02/84)
karn, I listened to a Sony CDP-101 on the same system I listened with the Apogee loudspeakers. We listened to a drum solo and a piano piece. The piano may have sounded OK to you but I turned the thing off after a half dozen measures into the performance. The drums were OK but as soon as the artist started banging around on the high hat, etc. I reached to put my fingers in my ears. Now I'm not sure if it's phase shift, poor software quality, error correction schemes, or the phase of the moon that's causing this problem, and frankly I don't care what the problem is technically, but it sounds terrible. The reason I picked phase is because it's the only spec that seems to be off with respect to all the others. It also seems to coincide with the band that has the problem, i.e., >5KHz. Listening to CD players like the LUX gives me hope for this medium. While still not super, it's far better than the Sony attempts. Ready for round two. Yours for higher fidelity, Phil Rastocny AT&T-ISL ..!drufl!pmr
karn@allegra.UUCP (Phil Karn) (02/03/84)
Once again, the only fair way to evaluate ANY recording system is to control ALL of the elements of the system EXCEPT for the presence of the recording system under test in the path. For example: 1. Pick an LP record and a turntable. Any record, your choice. 2. Play this record into a digital audio recorder (e.g., the Sony PCM-F1 videotape adapter, since average people can't make CD masters). 3. Requeue the record and digital player and play them in synchronization with levels EXACTLY matched. Getting a turntable to play exactly in phase with the digital player over any length of time will be very tricky. 4. Have a computer (or a confederate you cannot see) randomly switch your speakers or headphones between the two sources (without telling you which is which, or even if a change took place) and record your guesses as to whether the source was switched, and if so, which is which. Of course, if your point is to determine differences between CD players, this is easier. You can just start up two of them playing identical disks, match the levels exactly, then start with #4 above. If you can consistently tell which source you're listening to after many such trials, THEN I'll believe you. I suspect that you will find it impossible to tell the difference unless a) you set the recorder input level too high and clip the A/D converters, or b) the recorder or media is defective. Until you've been at least this thorough, you cannot make your claims. For all I know, you couldn't stand to listen to the Sony because you blew out your tweeters on the previous player. Phil Karn