rubin@cis.ohio-state.edu (Daniel Rubin) (07/10/90)
> > I would like to have the views from people who heard high end bitstream >converters and/or read comments in the international high end press about >the subject. Comparison with other technique high end CD's is wellcome. > > I read a couple of articles in Stereo Review's Compact Disk Guide Summer '90 all about bit stream CD players. In one review of a new Techquinces (I do not know the correct spelling ) CD player using the MASH bit stream system the reviewer said it beats the pants off of most any CD player out today. The thing lists for only $220. - Dan Rubin
jeh@dcs.simpact.com (07/11/90)
In article <4940@uwm.edu>, mead!rubin@cis.ohio-state.edu (Daniel Rubin) writes: > I read a couple of articles in Stereo Review's Compact Disk Guide Summer '90 > all about bit stream CD players. In one review of a new Techquinces (I do > not know the correct spelling ) "Technics". > CD player using the MASH bit stream system > the reviewer said it beats the pants off of most any CD player out today. > The thing lists for only $220. I find it quite amusing that SR would publish such a statement, as they've long held to the "if it measures the same it must sound the same" credo. And, of course, all CD players measure the same, or at least close enough that we shouldn't (by this thinking) be able to hear the difference. Of course, if SR came out and said "these new 1-bit decoders don't make a bit of difference, and neither did oversampling nor anything else", they'd have to tell us that there was no point in replacing our Sony CDP-101's and Magnavox 2041's... and SR's advertisers wouldn't like that! Yep. All CD players sound the same. And this year's models are better than ever. Right. --- Jamie Hanrahan, Simpact Associates, San Diego CA Internet: jeh@dcs.simpact.com, or if that fails, jeh@crash.cts.com Uucp: ...{crash,scubed,decwrl}!simpact!jeh
ytl@misty.Philips.Com (Ying Tat Leung) (07/13/90)
In article <4965@uwm.edu> jeh@dcs.simpact.com writes: (... stuff deleted ...) >I find it quite amusing that SR would publish such a statement, as they've long >held to the "if it measures the same it must sound the same" credo. And, of >course, all CD players measure the same, or at least close enough that we >shouldn't (by this thinking) be able to hear the difference. > (... stuff deleted ...) > --- Jamie Hanrahan, Simpact Associates, San Diego CA Actually Stereo Review's (SR) Julian Hirsh (who performs virtually all equipment tests for SR) has repeatedly stated in his equipment reports that technical measurements may not directly correlate with the perceived sound quality, although at this time we (or he) do not understand why that is so. Of course, one may then ask why he always does tons of measurements with a product, but that is a different story. On a different topic, would someone post the 800 phone number for Icon Acoustics again? I got a wrong number last time. Thanks.
peb@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Baclaski) (07/13/90)
Could someone post a pithy explanation of what bit-stream CD players do and what the advantage is supposed to be? I'm very familiar with oversamping and calibration of DACs since I have worked with analog engineers in the past, but bit-stream sounds like a digital technique. Thanks in advance, Paul P.S.: Wizzy, superaccurate CD players of the future: using an NBS tracable time base, time stamp each sample to compute out jitter in your samples...but this might be more accurate than the CD mastering process.
dan@rna.UUCP (Dan Ts'o) (07/16/90)
In article <5009@uwm.edu> acad!peb@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Baclaski) writes:
)P.S.: Wizzy, superaccurate CD players of the future: using an NBS
)tracable time base, time stamp each sample to compute out jitter
)in your samples...but this might be more accurate than the CD
)mastering process.
It seems that many current CD players are already more accurate than
the CD mastering process...