What is wrong with digital reproduction?

[speakerdave]

I always equate Yanky houses of worship with the Blues Brothers. . . .

. . . if only

[Skywave-Rider]

...I re-wired and re-labelled, we're about 90% done. I called the contractor that sold them their video system & matrix, and after asking the owner two questions about his installation that he couldn't answer, he said, "Um...who ARE you? You're not from around here." I sent him a resume' and will be calling to follow up soon- his company has the contract for an AV system in the local resort/water park. Hmmmm...
je

Way to go.

[Ducatista47]

The more classy the playback system the more frustrated the user become's with the recording production values and any aspects of the D/A process that are not optimum.

When I had the Lavy Dac it was painful to listen to many of my recently purchased CD.s.

Ian

Ian, I was wondering why you let the Lavry go. I'll take that as an answer? Should we take that as a cautionary tale, or should we still try to get our two channel systems to be as accurate as we can make them?

Clark

[Ian Mackenzie]

Clark,

I sold it because I was not using it often enough to justify owning it.

At that point in time I was spending more time holding a soldering iron and playing DVD music disk.

The same thing happened to the 4345's.

Sorry I am not a hoarder

I will answer your question in two parts:

Part one

The same issues were around in the vinyl days. We all loved dragging out our Sheffield Labs vinyl .

But today it is much easier to get a CD recording to market than a vinyl record 25 years ago. If you hear a band or artist you like "live'' dont expect high production values unless they are a super group or signed with a major labels. All the hi tech home recording gear is marketed to make it look easy.

Hence there is a lot more badly engineered recordings of otherwise very good music. You just need to weed out the good from the bad or put up with it. So its pot luck.

The saving grace is now some hi end lables are offered 24 bit downloads.

Part two

Reproducing music in you home is about creating an experience*.

There are more dissatisfied audiophiles around who spend a fortune on audio equipment they have selected than the mainstream consumer who walks in a hi fi shop and let the salesman sell them a complete system.

There are many pitfalls to assembling your own system and they are to numerous to mention here including spending rediculous sums of money on a set-up for a room that is just not suitable.

Hi end set-up = hi end room
Hi end amp = hi end source
Hi end speakers = hi end everything else
Hi end drivers = hi end crossovers + hi end crossover design

The list goes on. And stay away from Ebay

There is no simple answer other then buy something that fits the purpose.

Home audio hi fidelity equipment is for home use. Pro audio equipment is for people who work in the industry. There is nothing wrong with the equipment usually its the people who end up using it and the situations they are in.

That said if your loudspeakers are razer sharp accuracy you will get the experience but you will hear all the mistakes and problems with the recording. Pure piston mode loudspeakers are the worst offenders imho.

What to do about the problem. Well I have more then one system and the better system only gets my attention late at night.

Back to the Lavry is a wonderful DA convertor and has a quality headphone amp built in.

[cooky1257]

I always equate Yanky houses of worship with the Blues Brothers.

The Poms on the other hand take things a bit more seriously with real recordings of (real chiors) at well known chapels in Cambridge.

I think they take their Hifi dare I say a tad more seriously but that is another story

..And as for the churches in the godless hole that is Australia?

[Ian Mackenzie]

Well even the Catholics are not getting the numbers they once did.

(even the Catholic church is copping some flack for the indiscretion's some of the priest..no wonder the attendance is dropping)

As for me I go to the Temple every Saturday afternoon to listen to Hendrix.

There is only one God and he's Black!

Edit : Someone please turn on the forums spam filter.

[Rolf]

Hi folks.

There is nothing wrong with digital recordings/productions as long as they is taken care of from the beginning ... that is in the recording studio. Unfortunately most of the recordings today is made for radio (FM) using MP3 or other packed audio.

If one listen to a hi quality recording, played on a high quality player, it sounds much better than any previous analog recording .. without the hiss and pops that is on those.

If one had the Internet in earlier days one would heard people say: "the stereo has ruined my listening ... the way from 78 rpm to 33/1/3 is no good ... and now ... from analog to digital they say: oh no: oh no: it sounds terrible...

Get a hold of yourself. Do you really expect that a cd player at a cost of about $1000 can make you happy? No. Double it at least 5 times and listen! Then most of you probably won't complain anymore.

Goodgreef

[Ian Mackenzie]

Rolf,

The expression is get a grip but any way.

[Regis]

I agree with Rolf. Many of the modern smooth jazz artists like Bob James, take great pain to master their product very, very well. I am running a Sony CDP-D12 pro CD player (as some of you might remember, it was the last one available for sale in the United States, when I got it). It ran me all of $680 brand new, including shipping. My only complaint, is that the huge remote control doesn't have an eject button.

The CD player supports XLR and that's where I think audio makes a difference. Ever since I went to a full XLR system, I have not been found wanting as far as the reproduction goes (except for my foray into the Four Way world ). It sounds very clear, very detailed with no harshness or brittleness whatsoever.

From the source to the amp, it's all XLR. I find it amazing how many hugely expensive CD players support RCA or unbalanced jacks only. The notable exception were the Sony ES series and many of these aren't supported parts-wise any longer (if the laser goes, you are screwed).

[demon]

Do you really expect that a cd player at a cost of about $1000 can make you happy? No. Double it at least 5 times and listen! Then most of you probably won't complain anymore.

32ooo$ ??
must be kidding!
i dont listen to such monstrosities.


mikey

[Ian Mackenzie]

Possibly one avenue most are not aware of is you can make a CD player that will perform as well as the moost expensive stand alone with a PC

You need a Lynx 2B card, ELAC software and a windows PC. By ripping the CD to the HD any errors are eliminated

There are other approached using external card but requires AES card for jitter free output.

The reason the Lynx card works is many studios use Lynx in the conversion process. These particular cards have very low noise and very low jitter and are regarded as the industry standard for Sound Cards. They also have many advanced options not found in a standard CD player for control of conversion and filtering. Outputs are balanced.

Dont bother with a Soundblaster.

The cards sell for around $1000 and offer 2 inputs 6 outputs, add a quiet PC and software and you have a very hi end player and a music server for less than $2000.00

I seriously doubt you would find a $5000 or 10,000 cd player in a modern recording facility.

[Rolf]

32ooo$ ??
must be kidding!
i dont listen to such monstrosities.


mikey

As far as I have learned 5x1000 is 5000. Not 32000.

[Rolf]

Possibly one avenue most are not aware of is you can make a CD player that will perform as well as the moost expensive stand alone with a PC

You need a Lynx 2B card, ELAC software and a windows PC. By ripping the CD to the HD any errors are eliminated

There are other approached using external card but requires AES card for jitter free output.

The reason the Lynx card works is many studios use Lynx in the conversion process. These particular cards have very low noise and very low jitter and are regarded as the industry standard for Sound Cards. They also have many advanced options not found in a standard CD player for control of conversion and filtering. Outputs are balanced.

Dont bother with a Soundblaster.

The cards sell for around $1000 and offer 2 inputs 6 outputs, add a quiet PC and software and you have a very hi end player and a music server for less than $2000.00

I seriously doubt you would find a $5000 or 10,000 cd player in a modern recording facility.

I have never heard about this Ian, but it sounds interesting. One problem (for me) is that one probably must have a PC in the living-room, and I have no place for it there. If this card come with a RF control problem is solved, as I have the PC upstairs. An IR control don't work thru the ceiling.

I believe that the original CD sounds better than the same if burned and played on a CD player. You say "ripping to HD", and problem solved, using this system?

[SEAWOLF97]

Hi folks
Get a hold of yourself. Do you really expect that a cd player at a cost of about $1000 can make you happy? No. Double it at least 5 times and listen! Then most of you probably won't complain anymore.
Goodgreef

As far as I have learned 5x1000 is 5000. Not 32000.

1.$1000 doubled = 2000
2, 2000 doubled =4000
3. 4000 doubled =8000
4. 8000 doubled =16000
5. 16000 doubled =32000

1000 doubled 5x =32000 is correct following your original post, just like Mikey said.

I believe that the original CD sounds better than the same if burned and played on a CD player.

in the analog world , YES ,
digital - NO - sounds the same. There is no loss in multiple generations.

[Rolf]

Well, I guess I am not good enough to express what I mean in English. But what I mean was $5000. Not $32000.

Sorry for the confusion.