Archive through December 27, 2004
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | http://homerecording.about.com/od/techniques/a/eqarticle.htm http://homerecording.about.com/od/techniques/a/basic_comp.htm http://homerecording.about.com/od/basictechniques/a/basic_reverb.htm |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 326 Registered: Oct-04 | JV - yep - read and bookmarked it. Thanx. Well - brought home the Paradigm 20s today - did A-B after A-B test - sigh. Mer and I determined that they sound somewhat better than the Polks - but Mer is bothered by a shrill tweeter, as she puts it. Doesn't like the harshness she hears. OK. After long periods of testing - I determined that the Paradigms on my system sound nothing like what they did in the showroom. Called them - and they were very polite - saying that the test there was done on a B & K amp, with hi-end Onkyo DVD player. I asked if they'd cranked up the bass - and the guy said he didn't think so, but he wasn't real sure how to run the amp - but he never called me back. I take back the Paradigms tomorrow - very disappointed in what I heard - and VERY CONFUSED about it all. Will take the Polks with me to the shop, and plug them into the same listening-room system to see how they sound there. Something's rotten in Denmark - all the sound today was less than full - and only the jazz CDs sounded even half-way great. The HiFi shop DOES have a full repair shop, and I may just take in the Onkyo and have them check it over for whatever. Sigh. It's still under warranty, but I have to ship it to I think Newark, and until I know there's something wrong I hesitate to do that. Oh, sh--- - I'm really upset!!!! (sorry 'bout that) Let's see - there's no PSB dealer anywhere around - nothing is going well here in my listening room - in other words - NUTZ!!!!! Kegger - I'll post you whatever I find out tomorrow, if anything. Your ideas are still on the burner - Mer is very upset because she feels the sound so far hasn't been much better, and she's balking at spending more money. - sigh - better days must be ahead somewhere! Nothing much more to say - have a great night, friends!!! |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 546 Registered: Apr-04 | While reading about oversampling, upsampling, algorithms, and mathematical equations, I came very close to the condition: "...female...dismissing specs... when their little brains just can't handle it anymore?" - which was Jan's sexist way of interpreting John's article's sexist Men are from Mars.. explanation of male/female aural perceptions. So, I decided to pull a Kegger (not that way, Jan!) and get to the heart of the matter as directly as possible. My takeaways: Upsampling doesn't add anything beyond what's on the CD - but, the filtering does make a sonic or characteristic difference which, if done well, is a good thing. And, from the Stereophile link from Jan: In the meantime, don't buy a digital product because it has "24/96" emblazoned on its front panel. Buy it because it makes your CDs sound great. And if it can accept real hi-rez data from an SACD or DVD-A transport--or can be upgraded to do so, given the probability that these datastreams will be encrypted--that's a bonus. And, based on reviews, the Musical Fidelity A324 DAC is considered to be one of the better DAC's. Here's what one reviewer had to say about the MF A324: I heard more space and air, more low-level resolution, and, subjectively, wider dynamic range. The sound opened up and bloomed--almost the way it does with SACD. I heard harmonic delicacy--an extension and sweetness to the treble that reminded me of analog at its best, the way that SACD does. Ultimately, this is exactly what I would like out of redbook CD's - a more analog-like sound which I suspect I'm not getting from the Denon. Now, the question is, do I get closer to that by going to a tube CD player (Jolida JD100) or by adding an external DAC/upsampler (Musical Fidelity A324)? |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 547 Registered: Apr-04 | Larry, Looks like we crossed posts. I'm sorry to hear that the Paradigms were a disappointment on your home system. Do you think you are having a problem with the amp? Or is it a mismatch between the Onkyo and Paradigms? I've also heard that "better" speakers can sometimes reveal flaws in sources or recordings so perhaps it could be something like that....I hope that doesn't come across as an insult, it's not intended to be. See what the outcome of the Polks paired with the HiFi shops system is. If they sound good there, maybe upgrading the receiver might be the best route to take first. If you think you might go that route, let me know and we can work out a way for you to audition a nice NAD T763. <wink> Best wishes. I hope you can identify the culprit and move along your "Merri" way of resolving it. <wink> |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2635 Registered: Dec-03 | What a stream of wit and useful information, esp. Ghia and Jan. Two direct questions to me from Jan: 06:24 pm Correct me if I'm wrong. No, you're right. Except I think the "Enhancement algorithm" is another example of trying to get blood out of a stone. I can't see why people think you can do this. (Later, somewhere) Because true "brickwall" filters don't exist in reality I think that guy simply means that all real filters have some slope, or roll-off. I considered pasting in the relevant bits about upsampling and oversampling, but thought it would be more entertaining to paste the sexist remarks. MR, A typically red-blooded night out down under, I expect. The dark rings under the eyes of the Ambassdors betray lost weekends of wenching and heavy drinking, in my opinion. Mind, they were French.... RE surround sound, there is a German record company which has DVD-As with the six channels giving three stereo pairs for each dimension, I think; x, y, z. I am agnostic about the center channel. I have some DVD-As where its effect is rather as 2c describes - there seems to be more detail and "space" with the centre on, in place of the "phantom" centre created by switching it off. But that could be a result of the miking and mixing. I still think you can construct a complete sound stage from two channels, and microphones, only. Yes, Jan, I think the surround channels can do something for the overall impression of depth and resolution. I could list a few example DVDs, but I find these never get followed up. I will probably have to do without surround for some months in the New Year, but will get some of the Nimbus DVD-A transfers of their ambisonic analogue recordings, for future reference. If anyone can get it right, they surely can. How does it work? All I can suggest is that surround can give first-order (and odd-order) reflections from the back and sides of the recording/performance venue. Stereo cannot do that, for the simple reason that there is no source of sound behind you. So you only get a reflection, from the front, of the reflection from behind; not the first reflection, from behind, directly, as you would "being there". As I said several thousand posts ago; stereo can give you precisely the sound your would get in a opera box, lined, say, with heavy curtains/drapes. That's OK, but most real experiences of live performances of music are not like that. I agree that the Pink Robots etc. are not really the issue. If it is art, it is probably the audio equivalent of Trompe d'oeil. Pardon my French. I think we should draw a veil over these unseemly puns concerning self-delusion, especially with ladies present. Anyway, I find I can receive the e-mail notifications OK, but this forum crashes the browser on my WiFi-equipped personal digital assistant. Or "handheld", as they now call it. I think this is some kind of warning to lay off. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2636 Registered: Dec-03 | the sound your would get in a opera box Cannot let that pass; should be the sound you would get in an opera box BTW I read ""...female...dismissing specs... when their little brains just can't handle it anymore?" as irony, but that could be too generous. If the guy is serious, he has never corresponded with Ghia Cabriolet, that's all I say. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 548 Registered: Apr-04 | Good morning, gentlemen! In case it did not come across as intended, my post at December 17, 2004 - 10:40 pm was an attempt at humor. I did not mean to imply Jan (or John) is sexist. I used his commentary to avoid getting into the technical discussion. Don't get me wrong, I definitely appreciate the technical information provided and understand that it is important to have at least a rudimentary understanding of it in order to make sound decisions. But, ultimately, I won't/can't debate the methodology of the algorithms but I am interested in what the end result of the algorithms is. Hence the takeaways I listed. To further explain what I'm looking for out of the source, I would say I'm looking for another Mac-like revelation. When I first plugged in the MA6200 it was immediately apparent to me that the music had taken on a new dimension. What I was hearing was very natural sounding and, for the first time, I actually understood what was meant by soundstage. I understand a DAC won't add anything to a recording that wasn't already there (unlike a hi-res recording) but will it improve what I am hearing from redbook CD's? The only way I'll know for sure is to take the plunge, I guess. Which leads me back to the original question: tube CD player or external DAC? :-) |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "I think that guy simply means that all real filters have some slope, or roll-off." Well, uh, yeah, that's what a filter does. You know high pass/low pass, that sort of thing. What the designers of the first "brick wall" digital filters were saying about their new product was the ability to accurately take a signal at 21,500Hz and stop the signal (essentially) dead at that point without the gradual roll off that the previous generation of analog filters possessed. In the days when analog filters were the only recourse to a digital designer, the filter slope had to be chosen carefully. The steeper the filter, the faster the signal that could beat against the sampling frequency would be dissipated; 64dB being the typical slope. If the slope was too shallow, the upper frequencies were too high in level and the content of the signal would cause the aliasing effects that the articles mention. These effects could be in the range of 1-2% distortion product added at frequencies as low as 100Hz. That kind of shot the better specs thing out of the water, stuffed it and mounted it on the wall. In either case, the analog filters had phase effects at lower frequencies that gave a very weird sound to the early digital recordings, even those on LP's recorded digitally. And, the steeper the filter (desirable), the more the effects extended downward into the audible range (undesirable). The accuracy of the filters also was a problem in that the actual frequency where the filter took effect relied on maintaining very tight specs on the components used in the filter. When the specs said CD would be flat to 20kHz and the need was to have the signal attentuated by 22kHz, there wasn't much room for error. That isn't what the CD folks wanted as they looked to building $39 CD players. (Now look, you can buy a DVD player for less than that.) That was where the promise of digital brick walls came in. The use of a digital filter was supposed to give the accuracy of the needed slope with no effects at lower frequencies. And all for about $0.01 per unit. Now, as I read these articles, it is calimed that a filter with that type of action is difficult and expensive to build. WELL!!!!!!! I am left to think, from what I have read, the benefits that can come from upsampling have more to do with the (preferable) analog filters that can be designed to remove the unwanted crud. The algoritms of the interpolation from 44kHz to 48kHz would also appear to be of prime importance since that conversion in sampling frequency is where the most potential lies for signal loss. This whole process seems to me to be fraught with potential traps that could bring the entire system crashing down. I noted one article stated that upsampling could potentially create worse sound if everything isn't perfect in the transfer of signal from the disc to the upsampling system. This would seem to put an even larger demand on the transport mechanism to "get it right" and suggest that systems that are designed to work as a team may offer the best hope for success at this game. And given the history of jitter and clocking errors created by cables and connectors, the addition of more of the same in an outboard upsampling unit seems to simply add more potential problem areas. But, then I assume it's PLL to the rescue. Which leads me to a discussion of servo mechanisms ... If anyone is still with me and would care to discuss this, I'm game. I'm sure the "if you go at it long and hard enough" virtue comes into play somewhere along the line. Otherwise we shall all await Ghia's decision on her next upgrade. ********************** "I still think you can construct a complete sound stage from two channels, and microphones, only." John, read again my post on the phase and amplitude problems of recording a large ensemble (as Mercury did) without three mics, and tell me how you would eliminate the "hole in the middle" when using only two mics. If the mics are placed at any distance which is greater than the length of the lowest frequency you wish to record, the phase relationship of the two mics will not coincide. The third (center) mic acts as a "phase filter" as much as a recording device. *********************** "So you only get a reflection, from the front, of the reflection from behind; not the first reflection, from behind, directly, as you would 'being there'." ?????????????????????????????????????????? " ... surround can give first-order (and odd-order) reflections ... " Why only odd order reflections? How do the microphones know to filter out the even order reflections? Howdeydodat? ******************* "Stereo cannot do that, for the simple reason that there is no source of sound behind you." There doesn't need to be a source behind you anymore than there needs to be a speaker beyond your speaker to have the sound appear to come from outside the physical boundaries of your system, in stereo. (See above post to 2c.) It is the phase and timing relationships that your ear/brain processes to tell you where a sound exists in space. That is how you get the phantom center channel and the sense of depth in a stereo recording. It is a matter of how your brain decodes the signals that are on the recording that will tell you the apparent size of the space and your location within that space. Certainly you have recordings where you have thought, "Well, they placed the microphones back in the hall on that one". If you can't think of any, search your library for any Meloydia recording, they were always taken from a mid hall perspective. If you can discern the placement of the microphones in the hall, then you should be able to hear the hall itself. If you can hear a percussion instrument as being behind the strings, then you should have no problem discerning the other direction. Assuming of course, the other direction, if there was one, has been put on the recording. I'm beginning to think my brain is wired diferently than yours, John. Surround speakers can amplify the signal that is on the recording. No problem there. But if the amplification is too much or out of phase with the hoped for sound that comes from the front, then problems arise. For me. Apparently not everyone. In all cases. Or most cases. Or most people. Well, as they say ... double sigh!!! (Sorry, can't do a smiley face with this subject.) |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Ghia - Here's where I would start my thought process. Yeah, yeah, you can all stop laughing now. You think I don't have a thought process, that this stuff just comes streaming out like bunny poopage. Well, maybe it does, but now I'm thinking as if I were in Ghia's shoes. And they are a little snug, I'll admit. When I sold audio, which is far removed from the world of hifi/home theater stores of today, a dealer generally had a sense of what type of sound they wished to present to the client. It was normally displayed in what they called their "best" system. The rule used to be, with the people I knew, you could walk into a dealer's show room and ask to hear the very best system they could sell you. After listening to that system, you could decide whether that store was where you wanted to spend some time. Mac dealers had equipment that generally went along the same direction as Mac. Crown dealers had product that complimented Crown. Distinctions got blurred over time as products like Yamaha shifted their sound from one that was quite musical to one that sold in the Big Box stores. Dealerships also got absorbed as companies bought up companies and products were and weren't included in the transfer. But, if you can find a good dealer that is committed to the products they sell, not an easy thing today, I think you can still find that kind of synergy in the products they handle. If your local Mac dealer has any experience with upsampling units, that is where I would start. They probably won't be selling the MF unit, and possibly not the Jolida, but that doesn't mean they can't put things in a better perspective for you. Hopefully they won't cloud the subject more than it already is. Maybe they have a product they can suggest you try with your Mac before you make a decison. I don't think, from what I've read about the two units you're considering, you will go wrong with either one. It is more the matter of what will go "most right". I would certainly do some listening before I made a commitment. Possibly the best advice is to order both and decide for yourself with the system you want to place the new piece into. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2646 Registered: Dec-03 | Ghia, No offence taken. I understood the joke, and relished the care you took with "...interpreting John's article's sexist Men are from Mars.. explanation..." which makes it clear you understood that those are not my views. "Tube CD player or external DAC?" Well, as Aristotle is quoted as saying ... i.e. No idea. Sorry! My inclination is to think a bolt-on replacement DAC is only going to work if the transport etc. is compatible, which is perhaps the gist of what Jan was saying. Musical Fidelity seem to get the reviewers drooling over here, for amps and CD players, but I always fancy I can detect hint of flag-waving. That does not mean they are not good, anyway. Nice, clear answer for you, there, Ghia.... |
|
Bronze Member Username: AsimoPost Number: 40 Registered: Apr-04 | John A Ghia J. Vigne The digital parameters of our stereo video systems start to be very professional and complicated. In the old days of stereo I could understand that high power with low THD is good. Nowadays I get lost with all the new terminology: PCM, DTS, DOLBY 5.1 6.1 7.1, Bitstream ATF 24/192 44.1kHz up sampling, down sampling, 96kHz, 16-bit-resolution, 192kHz and many more. Most of us are not computer software professional or electronics engineers. trying to find the character or sound of a system according to the digital profile is a little bit complicated or meaningless. For example is 192khz better from 96khz or 44.1khz for CD and what is the DAC roll in this process? Listening is the ultimate sound test About DAC's for Ghia One of our opera club member recently added the legendary Musical Fidelity A324 DAC to his system: PIONEER 717 DVD, Anthem pre tube + Anthem power tube+ KEF 103\4 speakers. Did he get harmonic delicacy or extension and sweetness to the treble that reminded of analog at its best, the way that SACD does. Not at all It was somewhat better from the metallic sound of the top rated PIONEER 717 DVD player. Why Pioneer 717 DVD player needs an external DAC? I really do not understand. Another friend added simple DAC to old PIONEER 515 DVD player with excellent sound improvement results I think that the sound engineers of a well known manufacturer working on a new CD player try to fit adjust and calibrate the best internal DAC to the CD player existing transport. That's why NAD CD players ( just for example) 541, 542, or even 521 sound so good and do not need any external DAC. I know because I tested my NAD 541 CD player with the same musical fidelity A324 DAC and my original internal NAD DAC was at least equal. Another friend of the operas club says: ignore the technology just listen to the music |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2647 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan, Thanks. "read again my post on the phase and amplitude problems of recording a large ensemble (as Mercury did)" Could you direct me to that? Perhaps you can recall a specific search string - I can't, for the moment. " 'I think that guy simply means that all real filters have some slope, or roll-off.' Well, uh, yeah, that's what a filter does. You know high pass/low pass, that sort of thing." Don't patronise me, Vigne.....! (smiley or, better, gritted teeth) " What the designers of the first "brick wall" digital filters were saying about their new product was the ability to accurately take a signal at 21,500Hz and stop the signal (essentially) dead at that point without the gradual roll off that the previous generation of analog filters possessed." Exactly. I believe he is saying you cannot do that with any real-world filter. that was my understanding. it could be wrong. "If the mics are placed at any distance which is greater than the length of the lowest frequency you wish to record, the phase relationship of the two mics will not coincide". Yes, but.... 1. The phase information becomes less important as a cue to position, at greater wavelengths. That is why one should not be able to hear where one's sub-woofer is located. There is also the acoustic shadow, which is only cast by an object larger than the wavelength of the sound whose field it is in. (Put an armchair in front of your sub. No effect. Put a armchair in front of one of you main speakers. Big effect. ) 2. What distances are we talking about? Sound travel at about 1,100 ft per sec. So, at 50 Hz (lowest frequency on many hifi systems) the wavelength is 22 ft. On a floor-shaking 25 Hz sub it is 44 ft. At 100 Hz, where you can begin to resolve direction, it is 11 ft. Why should anyone want to put the two microphones even further apart than these huge distances? Our eardrums are only about 6" apart, about the wavelength of a sound at 2 kHz, yet we do not need a third ear to hear the direction of sounds of higher frequency. All the direction in all sounds we hear comes from the phase differences between these two detectors. Personally, I have never heard this "hole in the middle" in stereo - can you suggest a disc on which it is readily apparent? "So you only get a reflection, from the front, of the reflection from behind; not the first reflection, from behind, directly, as you would 'being there'." ?????????????????????????????????????????? " ... surround can give first-order (and odd-order) reflections ... " Sorry. Deduct marks for clarity. Do I have to draw pictures? OK....  In the original sound: Ping - wavefronts propagate in all directions. In playback of recording: Ping - In stereo, wavefronts can move downwards only (the speakers are at the front). Ping - In surround, the wavefronts can move in any direction (we have speakers all round). Red line: direct to listener. Heard in stereo? Yes. Surround? Yes. Green line: first reflection from front. Heard in stereo? Yes. Surround? Yes. Blue line: first reflection from back. Heard in stereo? No. Surround? Yes. Black line: first reflection from back; second from front, and so on... Heard in stereo? second, fourth reflections, etc... only Heard in surround? All reflections. Now, the brain may locate the direction of the ping, whatever, but in the case of reflections from behind the listener, these are actually missing if there is no sound source (speaker) behind him/her. He/she may imagine they are there in order to make send of the other reflections, but the forwardly-reflected sound is not really there - except those reflection that come from the walls of the listening room WHICH IS NOT THE ROOM IN WHICH THE SOUND WAS RECORDED. So, we have more information about the location of the original source of sound, even if it is in front of us, if we reproduce that sound using sources (speakers) behind us. QED. I hope. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Asimo - Certainly no one should get lost in the specifications of any component. And, for many of us ... why, Mr. Butler, our little ol' minds just can't get wrapped around all those numbers and decimal points and such. Oh my!!! That's for you men who are over competitive about such things. But the technology of what we are asked to buy is as much of interest to some of us as any other aspect of the system. Whether you believe in the validity of cables as a component within your system will depend as much, for many audiophiles, on whether you believe the technological story that accompanies them. With just a moderate amount of knowledge of impedance, inductance and capacitance, the concept of cables as an active portion of a system becomes more illuminated and, hopefully, less complicated to choose the many options available. Anyone who has tried hooking a long cable with high capacitance on the end of a phono cartridge, or between pre amp and power amp, should easily understand what effect they will hear as the result of their choice. If you have no idea why the cable will roll the high end or start your amplifier into oscillation, you will decide the cable is defective and start searching for a "better" cable. If you had a little knowledge and a litle information you might have avoided problems in the first place and you could then be home listening to your music instead of haunting the hifi shops for a cable or having your amplifier repaired. Take that example and interpolate the data to arrive at the role understanding the most basic function of upsampling plays in the selection of a component. As with upsampling itself, you are providing not entirely new information; you are after all, limited to a certain amount of that. Instead, you are adding more points of reference to the final data stream. The better to choose the component by, my dear. (I am aware many out there frankly don't give a dam*.) As to your experience with the external units added to your player(s), I would say that is in large part the result of a poor interface between the components. This is only my guess, since I wasn't present when the comparisons took place; but, it follows from the overall response external DAC's and the newer upsampling units have recieved over time. As one writer put the subject, you can't look at the devices as a way to make your car go faster. If you look at the device as high octane fuel you can see that various components will respond more readily to the addition of such fuel while other components won't benefit much, if at all. I think you found the importance of a top flight transport and all the acompanying parts of the player in front of the MF unit to be more of a Toyota Camry that a Lotus Esprit. No knock on Toyota Camry's or your components intended. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "Could you direct me to that?" My response to 2c on 12/17 @ 8:05. *** "Don't patronise me, Vigne ... " Sorry, just seemed to be an obvious point. *** "Exactly. I believe he is saying you cannot do that with any real-world filter. that was my understanding. it could be wrong. " Wait a minute ... but ... that ... that would mean what they told us ... what they told ... IT WASN'T TRUE!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Go ahead, John, tell me there's no Santa Claus. *** "Personally, I have never heard this "hole in the middle" in stereo - can you suggest a disc on which it is readily apparent?" This is easy, John. Doesn't cost a dime. Just move your speakers to the farthest corners of the room and listen to a string quartet, or a single announcer's voice broadcast in stereo. Then, if you can switch the system to mono. If the room is big enough, you'll hear the hole in the middle. *** "At 100 Hz, where you can begin to resolve direction, it is 11 ft. Why should anyone want to put the two microphones even further apart than these huge distances?" You will have to ask the engineers that one, John. But my guess would be they are trying to cover the width of a 55' stage loaded with musicians. It should be obvious that as the distance from the mic's capsule increases the intensity of the sound will diminish. Not trying to patronize you, you just seem to not se this as a simple fact. This dimishing volume will leave the last few viloins, cellos and percussion somewhat out in left field. By spacing three mics across the width of the stage, spacing them to slightly over lap, you can cover the entire width of the stage with only a few instruments falling gently outside the boundaries of the coverage. On playback this will give the extended "outside the box" sound of instruments extending beyond the limits of the speakers. *** "There is also the acoustic shadow ... " Red Herring, John. No engineer would place an object in front of a microphone. *** PING This is going to be patronizing so hang on. Look at your diagram. If "Ping" is a given frequency, from a given instrument, it cannot radiate at two angles at the same time. The angle of reflection is determined by the wavelength of the frequency. Just as with taming the reflections in your room, from your speakers, you will have the same angle from the source going to the right and to the left. What changes is the incidence of the reflection but not the initial angle. The single frequency soundwave propogates not in all directions but in ever decreasing directions. After a certian frequency the soundwave can only be reflected from a very narrow arc that is defined by the frequency and the dispersion pattern of the source. If it is a tweeter, or a microphone trying to capture the sound of an instrument, that ever decreasing arc is accompanied by increasing distortion and falling level. Granted a long wavelength bass tone is more omni directional that a violin, but, I don't see what you're getting at here. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 329 Registered: Oct-04 | Calling All Amp Experts! Yo - here's what I have to worry about. Took the Paradigms back - and talked with the tech rep at the HiFi store about checking over the Onkyo. Here's the skinny: With both Polks and Paradigms I had to boost bass 4-6 db to make it sound even somewhat "normal." I tried out the treble control with both speakers, and found that turning it 12 db either way made almost NO difference. Strange. When I played both speakers on the "pure audio" setting (no tone controls, no video side, no display) both speakers sounded like tin cans - very thin and the cello almost disappeared, while the high frequencies screamed at me. I think some-ting is very rong here - and I'm going to unplug everything tomorrow and take the Onkyo into the shop on Monday - just for them to check it over. I called Onkyo, but the gal was quite anxious to get rid of me (I thought "customer service" meant just that?) She said that I'd have to pay shipping to Newark, then, if they found nothing wrong with the Onkyo, I'd have to pay a $50 fee plus return shipping. This is now costing me half of what the unit cost in the first place?? Nope. So - what I'm pleading for here is HELP? Kegger: Thanks for your Discoveries post - I extended the speaker wires into the den, and the Polks sound "better" there - but still nowhere acceptable. My friend has what he says is a "Speakerlab 50-watt 2-channel amp" which he'll gladly lend me for some testing. Will try to do that late this aft and tonight. Will see. People in the HiFi shop said they thought I'd need a "better amp" to do justice to the Paradigms. And they suggested - Ghia take note - a NAD! Of course, they'd happily sell me one of theirs, but I said we needed to test out the Onkyo first, etc. etc. etc. OK - IF the Onkyo tests OK I'll try to get a full loaner receiver in here of some sort - and if it is better - well, a NAD may have to be in my future. Heck, it's only money! A bit "down" today - answering machine, dishwasher and some computer programs all crapped out - plus Mer's fighting an infected tooth. Hey, whadda day to have some fun! (grin) More anon - and BTW - I don't even try to unnerstand what y'all are posting re upsampling and filters and all. I'll stick to my own problems, thank you very much!d (double grin) More anon. . . |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | " ... but in the case of reflections from behind the listener, these are actually missing if there is no sound source (speaker) behind him/her." No, John, there doesn't need to be a speaker behind you to hear the reflection off the back wall. They are not missing if they were included in the original recording. And, they have a natural relationship to the sound that is recorded as being in front of us when the capsule that recorded the sound occupies the same, or close to the same (as with the Ambisonics microphone), space for both signals. It is when the device that captures the signal, or the playback device occupies a different position; or, by directional pattern, leaves a hole in the middle of the soundfield. The former is corrected digitally in either recording and/or playback. The latter is one of those, if you didn't get it right in the first place type items. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 724 Registered: Dec-03 | John, That doesn't look anything like my ears. What is with that pinkish color. My ears are gold in color. OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Now I see the problem! LOL! |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "So - what I'm pleading for here is HELP?" What do you want to know, Larry? When you run the receiver with the "pure audio" engaged, disengaging the tone controls and some extraneous circuitry, you should be hearing what the amp sounds like. There is a very slim chance (repeat VERY slim chance) the amplifier has a problem that keeps it from creating bass and makes it sound tinny if it is operating. The way to diminish bass response or boost treble response is to add a quantity to the signal. Just as a speaker X-over distributes the bass and treble by adding capacitors and inductors into the path of the signal, an amplifier would have to do the same thing to remove bass from the signal. The chances of this happening and the receiver still functioning are somewhat worse than the chances you and I will win the lotto together. Sorry if this comes as bad news or not what you wanted to hear. I could be totally wrong about this. But I'm telling you what I know from my experience. If the receiver sounds like it is producing it's rated power on both channels, then the likelyhood of a problem being in the receiver is slight. And the chances it will be a problem that Onkyo would say was under warranty are even less likely. If it meets its specs on a test bench, Onkyo will feel they have met their obligation. Even if, on the test bench, the amp is down 3dB at 20Hz, that isn't enough for you to hear as diminished bass response. If it's flat at 70Hz that should be enough for the music you listen to. Sorry. Take your Polks into the shop and give a listen with the B&K that you heard the Paradigms played with. The demo room is likely to be quite different that your living room. Pay attention to their room as well as the amp and speakers. I looked at your post on Discoveries, you seem to contradict yourself by saying cutting the treble helps but then saying the treble control doesn't seem to do anything. A salesperson and a tech are going to want to know which it is. Check your owner's manual, the treble control may have an effect that starts around 10-12kHz which isn't a dramatic change. Putting the Polks in a smaller room helped; meaning the small bass driver of the Polk is preferring a smaller room to energize the air. That goes to a lack of the lowest octave. That situation can be remedied by a subwoofer or putting the Polks in a smaller room. But you should find out pretty much what you need to know about your amplifier and speakers by comparing the sound of the Polks with a better amp in a different room. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | John - I agree with Rick. Your shading skills are exemplary! |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Your geometry sucks, but your shading is A-OK! |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 725 Registered: Dec-03 | Gee Wiz John, I don't know what to say. I thought you too had Golden ears. You say yours are pink? I'm sure Jan is as shocked as I am. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 330 Registered: Oct-04 | JV - here's what we hear. When the FM is playing, the Polks seem to sound rather full and natural. But when we play the CD player, things get all tinny. I've set the CD player up on another amp, and it sounds fine. So, what's going on here? is there some problem in the pre-amp? All I know is that both Polks and Paradigms sounded awful here, and I just don't know where to go from here. I THOUGHT I was getting a used 2-channel amp from a friendt- to test the system. But when I hooked it up, I found that only one channel of the darned thing was working! Called the guy, and he seemed "in the dark" about it - he hadn't used the amp for a long time. Sigh. OK - is there a chance that the CD player is somehow not putting out bass? I seriously doubt it. I'm going for a re-do of ALL the connections, and then see what happens. It's so frustrating! Very strange that this "loss of bass" thing has been happening recently. Didn't happen at first, which makes me wonder if some part somewhere is fading into oblivion! Youze guyz know about this, I just sit here and fret, because I do NOT understand all the "innards" of stereo. As I said, I'll strip it all down tomorrow, re-connect, and check one channel after another. It's the only thing I know how to do. Unfortunately, Mer is getting all upset over this, and I have to "tread softly" with everything at this point. When I brought home the Paradigms, she was ready to hear "better" sound, and when she said they were only a "Little" better, well, that started a bit of a tiff. Sigh. Ghia - got your e-mail. Thanks. A lot. More anon. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 331 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan V - yes, sorry - I probably DID contradict myself with the treble issue. Let me try again for you. Both Mer and I tried turning the treble control all the way up (+12 db) and down (-12 db) and it seemed to make very little difference. But. With the treble control down 4 db the CDs "seemed" to sound a bit less tinny and congested. Maybe that's just subjectivity on our part - probably was. Sigh. You can argue me into the ground, Jan, because I have little to stand on - I try to express my problems the best I can, but I do NOT have your depth of knowledge, and thus probably tend to make a fool of myself on occasion. This sound problem has me in very serious depression, and I'm trying the best I can to work my way out of it. One wire or connection or whatever at a time. This evening, listening to Garrison Keillor on the FM, the Polk's bass response (OK, they were set at bass boost +4) was very good. When I played a CD with the same setting, there was hardly any bass at all. I'm stumped. More latr. . . |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Rick, I am shocked. Shocked! SHOCKED!! SHEE-OOCKEDDD!!! I would have thought John's ears would be red by now. Larry. OK, Larry. Deep breaths. Take it easy, Larry. It's only a hifi. This isn't insurmountable. But you're getting pretty worked up about something you can't do much about right now. Nothing you do in the next 48 hours is likely to change anything. No wires, no connections, no nothing. So take it easy. If nothing else, take it easy for your wife's sake. Just walk away from the stereo for a while, Larry. Which is more important to you? The hifi or Merri? She's in need of some attention now, she's not feeling well and you should be taking care of her. The hifi will wait, and I guaranty the hifi will still be there when you get back to it. Take some time away from it and tend to Mer. Please. Forget about the hifi for the next 48 hours and think about something else. Things will be clearer when you get back, if you walk away now. Deep breath. Connections do not change to the extent you claim the sound has altered itself from a few months ago. Connections get dirty and they roll off the high end and cause static. Even that takes a lot of time. Changing your connections is just going to frustrate you and Mer. The connections and cables are not your problem, Larry. You say you've set the CD player up on another amp and it sounds fine. The CD player is fine. There's nothing you can do about the CD player, because the CD player is fine. It works the way it should, no problems. So scratch the player off your list. That only leaves the receiver and the speakers. You are going to return the Paradigms to the store and you can take your Polks with you. You will have a chance to hear your speakers on a different amplifier. When you hear your speakers with a different amp, you can better tell what your problem might be. Until you do that, there's nothing you can do between now and then that will change a thing. Nothing. Once that is done you can think about your system again. Until then, Larry, relax. This is not anything to get depressed about. Whatever the problem is, it can be resolved. But no amount of worry and tearing things apart is going to change anything right now. I'm sure what Merri wants right now is peace and quiet. Why not give her some. Sit down and talk to her about something other than the hifi. Go for a walk and enjoy the sights and the weather. Give Mer some attention and things will be much better in a short while. If she wants some quiet because she's not feeling well, then let her go for a while and you can take a walk. Just don't think about the hifi. Nothing you do can change anything now. Go do some laundry or something that will give Mer a break. So here's the game plan, Larry. Shut off the stereo and walk away from it. No stereo until you take the speakers back. When you listen to your speakers, pay attention to what the salesperson asks you. They are going to be trying to find your problem as much as you are. Pay attention to what they ask and give them the answers they need. Listen to your Polks with a better amp. Think about what they tell you they hear as your problem. You don't have to buy anything right away. And, Larry, this is Xmas. Let the salesperson get to some other customers too. Come back and think about what you need to do next. Throwing money at the situation isn't likely to get you the best solution. If you take it slow, Larry, you have a much better chance of getting this resolved. Now go talk to Merri about how she's feeling and see if you can put your energy into making her feel better. OK? |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 333 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan V. - (deeeeep breath here) The thing I appreciate most about you, sir, is that you Never Repeat Yourself! (grin) Mer's pilled and put to bed. Thanks. (second deeeeep breath) What stereo? |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Good night, Larry. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2650 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan, "Personally, I have never heard this "hole in the middle" in stereo - can you suggest a disc on which it is readily apparent?" This is easy, John. Doesn't cost a dime. Just move your speakers to the farthest corners of the room and listen to a string quartet, or a single announcer's voice broadcast in stereo. Then, if you can switch the system to mono. If the room is big enough, you'll hear the hole in the middle. So people put speakers in daft places. And engineers employ a third microphone because they put the first two in daft places, missing out some of the sound of the performance? Further to your other points. I still maintain that two microphones is enough. We have two ears. Yes, I am aware of the inverse square law: the power decreases with square of distance from the source. But that is a physical effect, not a property of microphones. It works just the same if the detector is an ear. If the engineer put the microphones where they missed some of the instruments, he put them in the wrong place. He should have just moved them back so that, together, to two cover the entire sound field. That is what you do with your head, when you listen. And most people have a fixed distance between their ears. Probably the engineer likes close miking, with multiple microphones, so he can fiddle with the balance, leave out audience sounds, etc. And generally get his oar in. Red herring remark was itself a red herring. There is all sorts of junk between the sound source and the microphones. This issue I was referring to was the acoustic shadow in the listening room; whether there is one depends on the size of the object relative to the wavelength of the sound. PING This is going to be patronizing so hang on. Look at your diagram. If "Ping" is a given frequency, from a given instrument, it cannot radiate at two angles at the same time. The angle of reflection is determined by the wavelength of the frequency. etc. Now here we really are using words in different ways. I have read that whole paragraph several times and it makes no sense, to me. If "Ping" is a given frequency, from a given instrument, it cannot radiate at two angles at the same time. It radiates from the source at all angles at the same time; that is what is meant by "Radiate". With a point source, the wavefront is a sphere. The angle of reflection is determined by the wavelength of the frequency. The angle of reflection is determined by the angle of incidence. the wavelength of the frequency velocity = wavelength x frequency What changes is the incidence of the reflection but not the initial angle. The angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection. Again, this is just what "reflection" means. "the incidence of the reflection" makes no sense. It does not matter what the frequency is. The single frequency soundwave propogates not in all directions but in ever decreasing directions No, it radiates. As it radiates, its amplitude decreases with distance travelled. It is still going in all directions at once. Look, I hoped the diagram make things clear. Yet I am misunderstood! Perhaps I did not take care to decribe the parts of it. Apologies for this. I am going to post it again because referring back to it, while scrolling, is very difficult.  The thing in the top left of the box is my crude attempt at a tuning fork (I forgot to block off the top). Sorry it looks more like a microphone - that would be massively misleading. The "tuning fork" is intended to represent a SOURCE of sound. The "Ping" is intended to represent a PULSE of sound, short enough to be able to measure the time of its arrival at various places. The Pulse radiates - progagates in all directions, and takes time to travel. The different colours represent different sound rays, not different sounds, or wavelengths. The rays have different paths. The ear hears the the pulse itself, and the different reflections of it, at different times. The brain takes the information and resolves the position of the source of the pulse. The speakers behind ("below" in the diagram) give a lot of that information - all the reflections coming from behind where the listener would have been, at the original performance. Without the rear speakers, all the brain knows about the reflections from behind is what it constructs from the reflections of those reflections. The ear hears these "second order" reflections (represented by the black line) because they come from the front ("above" in the diagram). It does not get first-order reflections from the back (blue line) at all: there is no source of sound there. Yes, the illusion of sound from behind can be created by stereo phasing effects. But it is an illusion. It is not as good as sound really coming from behind. For that, you need a sound source behind you. Ideally, two: you can then get stereo there, too. At the end of it all, just try it and see. I can recommend some surround sound recordings where it is so effortless to resolve the position of the instruments, and the size of the hall: it is a real pleasure. Yes, you can get some of this resolution in stereo, but not as easily, and not as well. Stereo is like listening, blindfold, in an opera box, and wondering what exactly is going on down there, and what sort of room you are really in. You can get a good idea, but it is hard work, and it distracts from the music. Surround sound, properly done, gives you much more information; the same as that you would have at the performance. You much more easily, even effortlessly, obtain the immediate sensation of being there. It is easier to hear the music. And therefore to listen. If this is what we want... (BTW I rarely resort to "clip art", but the ear came with a computer program, so I can take no credit. Mine are roughly the same colour, but hairy. No van Gough jokes, please....) |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2045 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry I feal sorry for your delema, wish I could be there to help! At this point I'm at a loss of what it would be. Your probably just going to have to try every piece until you find it. Just take it easy and slowly. I know it can be frustrating but you'll eventually figure it out, Just like Jan said remember it's not a life and death situation so there is no time frame! I hope it doesn't turn out to be a setting on your reciever or cd player. Maybe get out the manual for both and go over all settings. There are a lot of settings on the reciever, like midnight setting with compreesion or maybe your using a surround mode for cd with no rears or bass management on either the player or reciever. If your using bass management with no sub you will be loosing bass. Maybe that's why it use to sound good a while back and now it doesn't maybe you turned something on or off by accident! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2653 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry, Take it easy. I cannot think why you get tinny CD but not FM radio, and it seems to be the amp. In your place I would look at the connections from the player to the amp. The radio tuner stage on my NAD receiver seems to got some special treatment, in the design, and always sounds good. I get better CD (and everything) if I use the "Ext 5.1" input to the receiver, rather than the one marked "CD". But Jan is dead right. Sometimes just taking a break and thinking about it a bit is far more productive that trying everything in a state of frustration. Whilst in US from 1986-87 (is it that long ago?) Mrs A and I became completely hooked on "Prarie Home Companion". Is Mr Keillor still doing that? Always wished it could continue in UK, but it never got imported. I wonder why TV but not radio moves between countries. I sometimes think the world's view of the US is coloured by the selected media stuff it exports, and there is much better for consumption on the home market only. That could be true everywhere, I don't know. Mr Keillor stepped down not long after we left, wound up the Side-Track Cafe, left uncommented the grain elevator and statue of the loan Norwegian in the main square of Lake Wobegone. I believe he went to find his roots, lived in Denmark, and did not like what he found there. I can relate to that. No-one is accepted in European countries unless they were born and brought up there, possible exception UK, depending on which part. America leads the world in everyday, simple, easy-going tolerance, I always think. That could be a rose-coloured retrospect. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 334 Registered: Oct-04 | Kegger: Thanks! OK, let me "lead" you through my settings. On the Onkyo: Center - none; Sub- none; fronts - large (it is auto-set to large if you list "none" for subwoofer): surr: small. On the CD player - same settings. Now - right after I type this out I'm gonna go back and turn on the TV, then check EACH setting as I go through, one by one. What I can't seem to understand is that, when I put the amp on "pure audio" - no tone controls or video section on - the sound is all highs and upper mids, with very little lower notes at all! Mer says it sounds "screechy." A nice, technical term, I guess? (grin) Very strange, this - because - when I play the FM tuner, the sound, while not really great, is much fuller than with the CD player. This must mean something to y'all who understand electronics better than I do? Sorry about the 2-channel amp crapping out, but I gave it a try with one channel for a short time, and with the CD player going, the sound was still less than great. Sigh. Circuit City here is the "official" dealer-repair service, but knowing what I do about CC I don't want those mopes touching the Onkyo! When I called Onkyo they said to send it to their factory-service - which would mean expense of shipping. Then, they said, if they find nothing bad enough to declare it "broken" under warranty, they'll charge me for the inspection! Sigh. It's a can't-win for me there. So - if you have any brilliant ideas, Kegger (other than the ones you have every day!) I'd appreciate it. Oh, yes - you wrote: "if you're using bass management with no sub you will be losing bass." I'm not sure I understand. More anon. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 335 Registered: Oct-04 | John A. - Good morning, sir. Refer to my posting to Kegger as to my "immediate" intentions! As to Mr. Keillor: Yes, he did make an unfortunate "root search" journey to the Netherlands - and went through another wife in the process. Then he moved his show to New York, where his ego-centered antics got him trounced. Hmmm. . . Tail between legs he went back to Minnesota, where his program continues. Based on what the NPR station people have told me, he is a very difficult person. I hope that maybe he has mellowed through the years, but I no longer have personal contacts within his organization. Mer is an avid fan - has been ever since I've known her - while I rather pick and choose as each program is announced. I always listen when he's in New York, as he has musicians of top calibre as guests. Based on what I watch and listen to, John, I'm not sure that programs here at home are any better than what is exported to you overseas! Public Broadcasting, for example, has decided to diss us dinosaurs - now it puts rap, pop and Latin musicians on "Showcase" programs where the New York Philharmonic and the Met once resided. They say they're trying to appeal to the "young" audience. Fine - except that letters I've read Online and in newspapers indicate that they're losing their contributor-base as a result. These "young" Latin-music-listening folk are not coughing up any kind of big-bucks! Oh, maybe "Great Performances" to many people would include pop-rock - but I think PBS is "dumbing down" its programing - as our schools too often "dumb down" the curriculum just to pass along those poor students who go out into the world unable to spell or even read in some cases. Off my soapbox - sorry. . . Back to my stereo. . . more anon. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2654 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry, On the CD player - same settings. Now it is really important to know which way your have connected the player to the receiver. Digital or analogue? Whatever it is, you do not need both the player and the receiver to be set in the same way. It is "EITHER, OR". The player setting should only affect its analogue output. The receiver setting should affect any input, but only in surround sound, and then ONLY when it is doing it itself, that is, when not using "Ext 5.1" inputs. Switch surround sound off in the receiver. Then try the different inputs. I have to leave for some hours and cannot make a quick response. But please try it. You may find the solution before I get back, or someone else will. This whole bass management thing is a total can of worms. It is one of the best arguments for staying with stereo, imho. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Larry - How's Mer this AM? Hope she's doing better. I know when I had an absessed tooth many years ago, I wanted the world to go away. Every noise and disruption was like a jack hammer in my jaw. Of course it was in full anger on Saturday night when there was no recourse other than Scotch, a few pain killers I had on hand and some herbal remedy that I had acquired from a friend of a friend. Came in this litle baggie like a sandwich. The instructions were quite odd, I had to roll it up in a piece of paper; odd looking paper too, very thin, good to keep my mind off the pain though as the medicinal product kept falling out the ends; then, after it was packaged nicely, I had to put a match to one end and inhale the fumes of this rememdy. Unusual taste, I must say. Stayed on my clothing for hours. Why, I'd never quite had anything like that before. Cough. Cough. It could get you quite choked up if you were too ambitious about taking it in too rapidly. The effect was not unpleasant, though combined with the Scotch and the drugs, it was hard to separate out what exactly this herbal concoction was responsible for in the overall effect. I understand Ms. Joplin, Mr. Hendriks and Morrison all felt this way at one time. Now, I've been told, Mr. Ashcroft prefers hunting down Grannies that use that same herbal remedy. What a shame, it got me through that night. Tell Mer we're all thinking of her discomfort. I guess it's none of my businesss actually; but, how long did you not think about your system? I understand your frustration, Larry, just don't get too wrapped up in this. It's only a hifi. By the way, what's NPR got on their schedule for Sunday in Swampville? Anything of interest that can occupy several hours? |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | John - John - John - Don't know where to start on you today, John. Let's take this one: "Stereo is like listening, blindfold, in an opera box, and wondering what exactly is going on down there, and what sort of room you are really in." So it's come to this, has it, John? Now you're picking on people with diminished senses. John!!! Do you kick little puppies too?! I can only take away from this that you feel anyone with a visual handicap is incapable of enjoying a concert experience. I do wish you'd get out of that opera box once and for all and get down here with the commoners. I suppose you'd argue that common knowledge "myth" of one's other senses becoming more acute when one sense is diminished. That those people with visual impairments ("Crips" to you, I suppose) don't compensate with heightened hearing and sense of smell. (Though I'm certain anyone could detect the smell coming from that infamous opera box!) I'll have you know you are wrong, John! Dead wrong! And here I have proof. Proof that you cannot destroy. DAREDEVIL!!!!!! You read it right! Daredevil!!!!!!! Yes, Daredevil, from Marvel comics fame. Not from the (once again) poor cinematic portrayal of the character. Honestly, whoever put Mr. Affleck in that baggy suit as a way to "set him apart" from the "common" superhero should be placed in your opera box and made to listen to the most sacharine of Mozart concertos for all time. I'm talking the Daredevil that could take on the Sandman here, John. I'm speaking of the Daredevil that took on Spiderman. (Of course that was just a mere misunderstanding and they became allies in a later (special) edition. That's the Daredevil I'm discussing here, Mr. A! He'd know what kind of room he was in and what was going on immediately and could take his billy club and knock out Doc Ock with a richochet shot off the proscenium arch, bouncing once off the tuba and landing squarely between the bespectacled eyes of his opponent. That's the kind of blind guy I know. So don't you go talking like them blind folk don't know what's going on. Cause they do!!! So there!!! And you think you're so smart. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 726 Registered: Dec-03 | Hairy pink ears? Went over the head at mach 2 didn't it? I must say Jan, you sound rather fiesty, and in rare form today. Buckle up folks, could be a fun day........LOL! Out for a little shopping...............will return. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | John - Instead of tearing apart your poorly conceived ideas of how sound "radiates" instead of "propogates", let me ask this. Remember many months ago when I told you Dr. Amar Bose's research that indicated 9/10ths of what is heard by a listener in a concert hall is reflected sound and only 1/10th is then the direct sound? That was the research that led him to put 8 drivers on the back of his speaker and one on the front giving him 8 of his 9/10ths and 1/10th on what was left. (Oh well, I guess we can't have the math right all the time.) So, like, anyway, what happens to the reflections, even and odd "order", after they get the the listener's rosy (and apparently shaven) ears in your misconstrued diagram? Could it be, John, that the reason you find surround so interesting is that, in your world, once the reflections (since I see no direct sound arriving at the ear in your perfect descriptive tool) arrive at the chosen listener they go no further? In the concerts you attend the sound does not continue to travel on beyond the listener and then come back as more reflections that, as reflections do, bounce off the portions of the performance space behind the listener and make their way back to the chosen ear to be integrated by the brain into something that says, "Gee, even without my blindfold, I can tell I'm inside a building. And I can do that even without hearing the snap of a twig which indicates a wolf is coming up along side me to kill me and eat me."? Now if you listen to your music on a handball court I can understand your diagram, John. But otherwise, I would suggest you take another look at how you've drawn your diagram to only support your incorrect theory of "radiation". Think of i this way, John, your math is no better than Amar's and he's a multi millionaire. I could go on, but must I? |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 336 Registered: Oct-04 | Youze Guys go too fast fer mee! (grin) J. Vigne - thanks for the good wishes for Mer. She's been on my codeine/Tylenol pills, plus heating pad, plus some anti-bacterial mouthwash. This ayem she says she feels "almost human." Sigh. I guess the pain is a lot less - but at first light Monday, the Dentist gets called! BTW, I was "quite shocked!" (grin) when Mer said to tell you that she, too, has used alternate medicine of the type you describe - but without the Scotch. She opines that medical science is missing a good thing (whatever that means!) Yep. Actually, I got through the night without HiFi-think. I think. This morning I read the manuals for both the CD player and the amp. then I checked out all the connections to see that they were secure. they were. Checked speaker phase - all OK. (sounds weird when they're out of phase!) Then I went through ALL of my settings, first on the amp, then the CD player. As I have NO subwoofer - I set fronts (mains) to large - sub and center off - surrounds small. Then I did the same with the CD player. But they have a "SACD Direct" mode which turns off the CD player bass management. Tried it in both the on and off position - no "apparent" differences. Still getting high frequencies that are very "up-front" and lower-mid to bass frequencies that are attenuated. Not "gone," just weak. One VERY strange thing that I've been noticing, and you can call it "woo-woo" if you wish. Sometimes when I power up the receiver it sounds more full-bodied than at other times. I thought it might be dirty power - put on filters and such, which, amazingly, made the sound better! Never - never - thought it would make any difference. But I'm left with the nagging thought that the receiver somehow is "unbalanced" toward the higher frequencies. Did the tone-control-mambo again - same as before, the bass control makes a big difference, but the treble control makes very little difference. Onkyo doesn't tell me the frequencies that each control affects. The other thing I notice, Jan, is that whenever I play orchestral music at slightly higher volume levels, it sounds "congested and slightly distorted." I don't THINK it's the speakers - they do well at high levels with small groups and jazz. Sigh. I'm going to be checking out another amplifier soon, so will let y'all know if that makes any major difference. The Onkyo is pretty good, but a lot of people have e-mailed me that if I want "better" sound I'd better bet on a better amplifier. Like a NAD or a Rotel or a Mac, for Heaven's sake! (be still my heart, for the blue lights will warp my thinking!) John A. - I've tried all you've suggested, and still have my original problem(s) Question for all: PBS station here won't give me an answer, but do you suppose they have some kind of low-bass boost? When the FM is playing all the sound is apparently un-tweaked - but I'm able to hear these wonderful low-bass notes that I simply can't get with the CD player. Frustrating! Happy shopping, Rick - you poor soul! Christmas shopping, I assume? Hmmm - Mer and I are fortunate (also without children) enough to have given up on that years ago. Too many shopping-jerks out there!! (grin) More anon - with thanks. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Larry - I'm uncertain as to your meaning of wonderful low bass notes coming from FM. As FM broadcasts are bandwidth limited to a low frequency limit of 50Hz, I can't imagine where you're getting low bass from. That, my friend, could be a problem. But, don't worry about that. You have bigger fish to fry. Once you audition the Polks with a better amplifier we can address the frequency response of your tuner. John - As to my red herring of your red herring, I will venture a guess that you are now trying to make kippers. But that is such a small point of error in your misinterpretation of the why's and wherefore's of microphone pattern coverage that it is of little consequence. You see, by the time I got to that portion of your dissertation, I was nodding off badly and had begun to think about rearranging the furniture. I had for a moment considered placing a rather large bookcase in front of one of the 3/5a's. Your reassurance that the bass frequencies would "radiate" around the edges of the acoustic shadow of the obstruction was my inspiration. I relented when I came to my senses, took the blindfold off, if you will, and realized I knew better than to place a large object in the path between my speaker and my listening position and that you were truly full of Hooey. Too bad, if you had been even a bit more correct you might have had me moving things around. That bookcase would have looked nice in that spot. Quarter sawn white oak, you know. Very attractive. I have a recording of Mr. Keillor's "farewell performance" before departing for lands unknown. I've wondered whether he would find that to be a treasure (since he once offered it for sale) or if he would prefer to forget that time and wife. Too bad, really, it was a marvelous performance with numerous artists there to bid farewell to Lake Wobegone. He should retire more often. Not that I find his shows uninteresting. (I could do without Guy Noire though.) I had made a habit of taping his shows on Saturday nights while I was working so I could hear the show later that night. I still have dozens of those tapes from the '80's and find when I need to get my mind off some problem (not referring to you, John) they do the trick. The tapes have performances from several artists that have since passed on to their greater reward (that's how believers put it, isn't it?). Terrifc humor without a single foul word in any of it. Somewhere in all those tapes is the story of the old woman dropping over dead in her tomato patch. I'll have to dig that out. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 337 Registered: Oct-04 | JV - in this case, I'd have to consider 50 Hz "wonderful, deep bass." What I hear on FM is the real, basic-vibrations of bass viol, low notes on pipe organs on the show "Pipe Dreams," and the great "feel" of an orchestra's bass and percussion sections. With the CD player, I often feel that I hear overtones, not the basic-note vibrations. So, if 50 HZ is the low-limit, I must NOT be hearing notes that low when playing CDs! Oh, on some SACDs I think I DO hear such, but for "everyday" CDs - not really. Perhaps what is wrong is that the upper mids and highs so far overshadow the lower tones. . . Anyway - yes, after auditioning a better amp I'll post more about my need for tone-tonics! (grin) PS - Sorry, Jan, but "Guy Noir" is one of my favorite parts of the Prairie show. BTW - did you never get the "glop" I sent more than a week ago? It should have been there last Wednesday. . . sigh. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2655 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan I can only take away from this that you feel anyone with a visual handicap is incapable of enjoying a concert experience. Not at all. They seem to make bad home secretaries, though. Anyone for identity cards? With "biodata"? Are we the last people alive who have read "1984", Jan? It's digital encoding that makes all this possible. At ZA¼rich airport last week I read a notice advising me that I could give my fingerprint at check-in, and, thereafter, not have to present my passport, just have my fingerprint taken and matched. This must mean they digitise it, and send the image over a network. By the time I got to the head of the queue, I was ready with "And what else will you do with it?" - but they did not ask me to particpate in the trial. Is any one else as scared as I am by all this? People seem to have forgotten that "anthropometric data" was supposed to be how you could tell a true Ary*n.... I do wish you'd get out of that opera box once and for all and get down here with the commoners. Love to. But the opera box is where you stay with stereo. That's my point. I want to be down there, smelling the rosin on the strings, drinking in the sounds, looking at the shapely ankles of the ... etc. etc. Anyone interested, here is a brilliant Ripple Tank Simulator Java applet. I was thinking how to make my diagram show waves, not rays. This is much better. Choose from the pull-down menu "Set-up: Single Source" and "1 Src; 1 Freq (Pulse)". It is a massively cool applet and worth spending some time playing with. I should think the herbal rememdy could enhance the experience; I don't know. While listening to the "Pink Robots", perhaps? I took the dog for a walk this afternoon, during which I chucked stones in two different parts of a very still lake. PING. In the side-arm of the lake, the reflected waves came back from the three sides after a minute or so, making the most beautiful interference patterns. Simulating stereo, one has to imagine that reflections can only be seen coming from one side. From the other sides, the reflections are there, but only the reflections of those reflection can be seen. On the main lake-shore, the ripples went on for many minutes, reaching far across the lake, dying before they met anything to reflect them. Isn't is a beautiful world? Oh, wait a minute: The following words are not allowed on this discussion board: Ary*n Please revise your post to remove the words indicated above That's alright then. No problem there. Sorry to type a nasty word. Compulsory amnesia. The world is in safe hands. Someone else has decided there is nothing to worry about, and old problems are best forgotten. We are safe. God, apple pie and George W. + TB are all we need. How to relieve stress. As 2c put it so eloquently: JFC. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Who out there can tell me about Ray Brown. I just picked up "Ray Brown - Jazz Cello" on Verve. Recorded back in 1960. A 96kHz, 24 bit SACD. I won't get a chance to listen to it until tonight or possibly tomorrow. I thought I'd get filled in on the man and the music if anyone has information. |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1205 Registered: Aug-04 | "A 96kHz, 24 bit SACD" Huh? |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "Is any one else as scared as I am by all this? People seem to have forgotten that "anthropometric data" was supposed to be how you could tell a true Ary*n.... " I can't ever remember exactly how it goes, but it amounts to the people are sheep as long as they are constantly in fear. But, John, at least we are beyond "just go shopping". That is something to be thankful for this X-mas season. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Sorry, I was looking at two discs and combined the two pieces of info. The Ray Brown is not the SACD. It is 96kHz, 24 bit. |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1206 Registered: Aug-04 | When Herman sang: "Mrs Brown you've got a lovely daughter" he was quite serious and things did not stop there. After a bit of shannanigans, Mrs Browns daughter discovered she had the proverbial 'bun in the oven' who, when baked to perfection and removed, she named 'Ray.' Whether or not it was was the musical compliment that began the post developement of Ray, he showed a great musical prowess as a youngster, and as a young man formed "The band Of Renown" and never looked back. Ray played with many jazz greats through the years and more recently backed Ms Krall, nee Mrs Costello. Hang on - maybe Herman wasn't Ray's old man, my timeline is a bit out. Oh well! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2656 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry, "basic-vibrations of bass viol". If it is a six-string: D. About 70 Hz, or 67 Hz at "low pitch". If it is a seven-string, it is usually A. 55 Hz. Jan, "I had for a moment considered placing a rather large bookcase in front of one of the 3/5a's. Your reassurance that the bass frequencies would "radiate" around the edges of the acoustic shadow of the obstruction was my inspiration." No, a bookcase say 4 ft wide will cast an acoustic shadow only above about 250 Hz. At lower frequencies, it is not there. Quarter sawn white oak is especially distracting though, probably, and the extent of the effect may depend on the colour of the carpet. Again: velocity = wavelength x frequency And the velocity is constant at 1,100 feet per second. The rest is simple arithmetic. Larry and Jan, Thanks for updates on Mr Keillor. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2657 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan, people are sheep as long as they are constantly in fear It's where the flock is heading that scares me. All the best. |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1207 Registered: Aug-04 | Jan - re Ray Brown I discovered this great thing called 'Google' it's really triffic :-) here: http://www.telarc.com/biography/bios.asp?aid=9 |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1208 Registered: Aug-04 | Larry, Hope Merri is feeling better. Not so long ago my wife developed a terrible absess. It was a weekend and she woke to find that the side of her face had swelled up very badly. The local doc prescibed some antibiotics. Next day the swelling was worse, her face almost a balloon and we went to an emergency after-hours clinic where she had an injection. A few hours later and the swelling began to go down. We were told the absess was that far advanced (becoming quite dangerous) that the doctor should have given her an injection in the first place. The pain was immense so I can understand what Merri is going through - take it seriously and seek medical help asap. Your sound problem. Sometimes we overlook the the most simple things. If when you first got your Yamaha universal player and the sound was much better (at least I thought you said it was) then the possiblity of something overlooked may be there. I assume you've got your front L & R and rear L & R channels hooked to your receiver into the appropriate multi-channel analogue inputs (the sub and center turned off in the Yamaha's settings). Do you switch your receiver to the multi-channel in when playing sacd or cd? Have you set your speaker volume levels in the Yamaha. Is there a speaker level setting for the multi-channel inputs of your receiver? (My Marantz has this option). As you are not using a sub and have it turned off in the Yammy's settings, how do you have your speakers set and what lfe crossovers are you using? Is there a special filter for when speakers are set to large - my Denon has this option. For cd playback only, try a digital connection (either coaxial or optical) and use the receiver's processing. See if this improves the sound. It's not that I think you don't know what you are doing, I know myself how easy it is to overlook the simplest of things and become frustrated when you know something should be working right when it is not. Just some thoughts that's all. Good luck to you and Mer. Her with her problems and you with your perplexions. :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 338 Registered: Oct-04 | My Rantz: Ok, here we go. Receiver always set to multichannel except when playing DVD stuff - movies. then set to digital coax. Yep, I've checked out all the speaker settings, and read the manuals three times today. Sigh. All set to: sub-no center-no fronts-large surround-small. No crossover set because no subwoofer present. Yes, I've tried playing the CDs in digital coax output - its louder, but not necessarily better. And yes, MR, I DON'T know what I'm doing! If I did I'd have bought a $300 home theatre-in-a-box and forgotten all about this "Highest Fi" stuff!! GRIN Taking the night off - will tackle the situation again tomorrow. Mer is feeling better - the anti-bacterial wash and the codeine/Tylenol have made her feel almost "human," according to her. Dentist-call tomorrow, fer shore! Don't want to chance what might happen if this tooth infection gets deep into the gums! Meanwhile, found some neat-oh "Orajel" swabs that pretty much numb up the tooth area. Break the swab (looks like a Q-tip) in two, then rub the medicated end over the tooth area. Amazingly effective - over the counter at 5:95 USD. OK - gotta go do a bit of dinner. Thanks for the posting - and your concern! More anon. . . |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1209 Registered: Aug-04 | Okay, Larry Looks like the gremlins at work! Enjoy dinner at least. Glad Merri is feeling a little better. Cheers for now. |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1210 Registered: Aug-04 | Re: Ray Brown Okay, okay - it was Les Brown and The Band Of Renown. I was tired :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 339 Registered: Oct-04 | MR: Yah seen one Brown, yah ain't seen 'em all! GRIN |
|
Bronze Member Username: AsimoPost Number: 42 Registered: Apr-04 | Larry R John A J. Vigne I see the discussion about the low notes of the cello and I want to clear something I did not say the ultimate test for Hi-Fi stereo system is a string quartet with a cello or contrabass. String quartets and violins are good for upper frequencies testing. I also add piano CD, pure vocal CD, and grand opera CD. If I am really interested in low frequencies I bring an organ CD. I think this combination is covering all the frequencies. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 340 Registered: Oct-04 | G-day all - Asimo - yep, I think I understand your points, and I use string quartets for testing all sorts of things stereo - because of their incredible overtones. And personally I find if the cello sounds "natural" in a test, then the speakers, etc. must be pretty good. Personally. . . For those of you who know and have seen the movie: "It's a Wonderful Life" 3,498 times - I present an alternative version. - - - - - - - - http://www.angryalien.com/ - - - - - - - - I'm away to varnish a table, and bring more sensitive plants inside (another freeze coming this afternoon) - and Mer is away to the dentist later. In other words, a "typical" boring day! Interesting - as I went out to get the paper this ayem, I met a neighbor who was in a really foul mood. What's wrong, I asked? In reply I got a litany of how she had to finish buying dozens of presents, and really hated to spend an entire day in the stores. Sigh. I made the mistake of wishing her a Merry Christmas - and she allowed as how maybe Mer and I are right, after all, in just refusing to join in the buying frenzy and all. I told her it was her choice - but she said she gets so much pressure from family. . . at which time I stopped her and suggested that a good sit-down talk with family might help. Hah! She said she'd tried that, but everybody kept clamoring for presents, and she felt "trapped in Christmas." Well - I'm afraid too many people are there with her. For those of you who may feel the same, I send you condolences, and a wish for a Holiday Season filled with love, light and cheer. (and a partridge in a pear tree?) Mer and I will do our usual Christmas Eve "ceremony," where we put on a couple of "classical" Christmas CDs (Chanticleer for one),light some candles, have a simple dinner with a very good wine - and make and drink toasts to all our friends (and "some" relatives!). Please note that all of your "forum names" (and as many "real names" as we know) will be added this year - for each of you has, in some way, made our lives a little richer. More anon. . . |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1211 Registered: Aug-04 |  |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 728 Registered: Dec-03 | LOL! Very funny Rantz...................... |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 555 Registered: Apr-04 | LOL! Thanks, MR. :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 344 Registered: Oct-04 | To all: Christmas may be a bit bleak this year - Mer's father is hospitalized after a stroke and a fall that broke bones, etc. We leave for Sebring Tuesday afternoon - right after Mer has a bout with the dentist! Ugh. Will post more whenever we return - probably not until Christmas Eve or Day. Sigh. When it rains, it pours! More anon. . .and Happy Holidays to all. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2661 Registered: Dec-03 | MR, Smiley! |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 730 Registered: Dec-03 | Larry & Mer, So sorry to hear the bad news. Carry on and do what you must. Do try to carry the spirit of the season in your hearts. I hope all turns out well. |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1212 Registered: Aug-04 | Larry, Mrs Rantz and I are sorry to hear about your bad news also. Hope things turn out better than they now seem and that that Merri's dad is going to be okay. May the season bring some cheer to you all. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Holiday greetings to everyone. It appears life keeps moving on for all old dogs, from John's move to Larry's news about his in law and including Rick's venture into tubes. From large to small changes, I hope everyone finds a bit of good luck coming their way this new year. Rantz, I didn't think there was a snowy X-mas in your territory. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 731 Registered: Dec-03 | Thank you Jan. I wish you good health, laughter, and the luxury of simple elegance for the holidays and coming new year. I also thank you for all the great advice, and your friendship. That means more to me than you will ever know. To all the "Dogs" my very best wishes always. Cheers! |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2047 Registered: Dec-03 | Speaking of good luck! I won this weeks round of playoffs in fantasy football by 1 point! On to the championship! WWWWWHHHHOOO HHHHHOOOOO GHIA HOPE YUR DOIN WELL! What you upto? |
|
Gold Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 1213 Registered: Aug-04 | "Rantz, I didn't think there was a snowy X-mas in your territory. " Discovering there's no Santa caused me enough distress! Now you tell me we don't have any snow either? Maybe I should become a Buddhist like Rick! "Enlightenment is when we accept everything is an illusion." |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 556 Registered: Apr-04 | Congrats, Kegger! I finished the season 10-3 and won the first playoff game by 47 points. One more game....Good luck in your Super Bowl! Happy holidays and best wishes to all the Old Dogs!! |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 345 Registered: Oct-04 | To all: Thanks for your good wishes. Docs this ayem say "Dad" has broken arm and three broken fingers - but will recover from the stroke - slowly. Mer goes into the dentist (again!) at 1 p.m. and we'll leave for Sebring right afterwards. OK - I just want to thank ALL of you for past kindnesses - and continuing good advice. There's always a person who is in "worse shape" than you are in life - witness our phone call from good friends last night - their 27-year old daughter just died of a brain tumor. Sigh. (why do things like this always seem to happen at Holiday time???) Food for thought, I guess. We'll post more on our return - but probably not before Christmas at this point. And to Kegger and Ghia - well, good luck to both of you in your "football" skirmishes! I like to see good, clean sportsmanship!! (grin) More anon. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 197 Registered: Jun-04 | To all the Old Dogs, Happy Holidays! May you all be * in good health in these unhealthy times; * safe and secure in these uncertain times; * at peace in these troubled times; and * happy in this joyous season! Keep warm wherever you may be. Cheers! |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 384 Registered: Feb-04 | Larry R., My sincerest wishes that things turn out for the best. Have you seen the recent issue of The Absolute Sound? There is an ad for Walker Audio with a testimonial on the effectiveness of Vivid CD and DVD enhancer signed by one "L.R." His testimonial mentions how impressed his wife was with the improvement in sound and picture quality of Vivid enhanced discs. Might that be you and Mer? It sounded familiar. Hey, Old Dogs, May your holidays be bright and full of good cheer! |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 346 Registered: Oct-04 | Two Cents: Still waiting for Mer to get back from the dentist before going to Sebring - am beginning to worry - it's been a LONG time! Sigh. Anyway - yep - dat's us. Mr. Walker e-mailed me that they were going to use part of what we'd e-mailed to him re our impressions after using Vivid on both CDs and DVDs. Mer was especially happy with the video results! Now I'm into yet another product - actually designed to clear up racing car windows and other plastic thangs. I'm super-happy with this stuff, and don't hesitate to recommend it - BUT - you have to order it from a little company called "Zaino." It's actually a hi-end car finish company! But heck, this stuff puts a finish on CDs yah gotta see to believe! OK - more later - will post after we return from dealing with Mer's dad. Have a productive week, all!! Bye for now. . . |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2048 Registered: Dec-03 | I'm sure it's the same for all the dog's, but i'm busy at work and home so postings will be rare for awhile! BUUTTT!!!!!!! More anon. . .and Happy Holidays to all. Do try to carry the spirit of the season in your hearts. I hope all turns out well. May the season bring some cheer to you all. Holiday greetings to everyone. It appears life keeps moving on for all old dogs, from John's move to Larry's news about his in law and including Rick's venture into tubes. From large to small changes, I hope everyone finds a bit of good luck coming their way this new year. To all the "Dogs" my very best wishes always. Cheers! Happy holidays and best wishes to all the Old Dogs!! To all the Old Dogs, Happy Holidays! May you all be * in good health in these unhealthy times; * safe and secure in these uncertain times; * at peace in these troubled times; and * happy in this joyous season! Keep warm wherever you may be. Cheers! Hey, Old Dogs, May your holidays be bright and full of good cheer! ......................Y E P ..................... |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Larry, don't click on this, it will only frustrate you: This seems perfect for Kegger. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "The Polyphonic Spree has such a big, dynamic sound, with so many elements, that the group's music is an ideal medium for creating a powerful surround experience," said Jeff Skillen, Vice President of DTS Entertainment. "Fans familiar with their work as well as those hearing them for the first time will be blown away by the 5.1-channel remix of 'Together We're Heavy' - there are so many nuances that truly come to life in surround." "Working on the surround mix for 'Together We're Heavy' was an amazing experience," said Tim DeLaughter. "For the first time, we were able to truly realize what we had envisioned musically as a group. I definitely intend to create more multi-channel mixes in the future." True believers. What can I say? John? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2665 Registered: Dec-03 | E-mails or "private" messages have been sent to everyone on this thread. I hope we can see if Vivid does what it says on the tin. To each and every poster: even if you are not bothered with the Vivid trial, you might like some of the tracks. Any one who likes all of them deserves some special award! Best wishes. "Enjoy". John A PS I have my firmware-upgraded NAD T533 back (it took them one working day). The dealer congratulated me on getting NAD to express-mail them the software CD, to enable the player to play copy-protected DVD-A discs. I felt good, and thought I had finally connected with the dealer, until the guy who gave me the box said he had checked it himself, and the picture is now much better... Well, they were very busy. Anyway, it works, and I can now try the EMI Mahler 5 DVD-A. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2666 Registered: Dec-03 | Jan, "LOL". First link: So you've invested in a DVD-Audio capable system complete with a discrete connection (all six cables), a new preamp, a big tight sub and even some capable rear speakers '" but your life is somehow still not complete. ...so you have the wrong subwoofer cable, presumably? Second link: Nice to see the 60s are back! What's a "theremin"? It sounds like some sort of small mammal. I hope the box says "no theremins were harmed in the production of this DVD-A".... |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 198 Registered: Jun-04 | What's a theremin? Check this out: http://www.thereminworld.com/learn.asp If you have an LP or a CD that contains Spellbound Concerto (usually in the same set as Warsaw Concerto, Dream of Olwen, etc.), you'll hear a particular eerie sound. That's the sound of the theremin. |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2049 Registered: Dec-03 | I thought those were the little guys jamming in a pict with floyd! Are they anything like lemmings? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2667 Registered: Dec-03 | Fantastic, Don. Thanks. You live and learn. I thought just like Kegger. I had heard of those things, but did not know the name. I see Bonzo Dog used one. Wow. CD download issue: The disc images are bigger than the discs. They download to give an image that is too big to burn onto one CD. Anyone interested should be able to delete one track to bring the collection down to size. I used Apple "Disk Utility" to make the disc images. Anyone know how to make an exact audio CD copy using that program, or something else readily available? |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 199 Registered: Jun-04 | The disc images are bigger than the discs. They download to give an image that is too big to burn onto one CD. How could that be? The total image size should be the same as that on the CD if it was an exact copy. I don't understand the difference. I use the old EZ CD Creator, (formerly Adaptec, now owned and marketed by Roxio), to rip CD tracks as .wav files at their original 44.1 config. Alternatively, I use NTI at times when EZ CD crashes on me. But you're using a Mac, and I'm not sure what software options you have. Re: your 750-mb file, if your software allows you to rip the CD tracks individually, then please do that. That way, we can selectively download the tracks from each disc. Even with broadband connection, the 750-mb file is still too big for a one-time download. (We're in the midst of a winter storm right now and just barely made it to work. So, anyone, post some some good jokes on the Jokes thread. I sure could use a good laugh :-) |
|
Silver Member Username: SemNew York USA Post Number: 385 Registered: Mar-04 | Ok, you asked for it.... |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2050 Registered: Dec-03 | "We're in the midst of a winter storm right now and just barely made it to work." ....................Y E P...................... |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2671 Registered: Dec-03 | Don, Good idea, thanks. I will not be able to fix the files until early next week. Will post here, when I have done it. |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 201 Registered: Jun-04 | ...we have made some CDs to see if Vivid treatment really gives a better copy. I just want to confirm that the Vivid was applied on each source CD, not on the output CD? Also, that the tracks were ripped before and after applying Vivid on the source CD's? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2672 Registered: Dec-03 | Don, I just want to confirm that the Vivid was applied on each source CD, not on the output CD? Confirmed. Also, that the tracks were ripped before and after applying Vivid on the source CD's? Only after. Here are the details, for you, Don, and any more technically-minded Old Dogs. The source CDs were identical compilation CDs made by burning newly-opened Verbatim CD-R discs with iTunes on an iMac, having imported the tracks from the original CDs into a single iTunes library as 16 bit, 44 kHz aiff files. Importing was done with error correction off. Burning was to "Audio CD" format at highest available speed. Three identical discs, all made in the same way, were sent by post. Two were returned, marked to distinguish them. These are what I am describing now as "source discs". Which of the two was treated is not known by me. I then made a disc image of each disc, and named the images "Rex" and "Shep". Which name corresponds to which CD name is not know by Jan. So no-one knows which is which, at the moment. I have the two "source discs" and will see what I can do to make exact disc images and/or separate file next week. I assumed most people would want to burn CDs from the disc images, in order to play them in a CD-player, but you could stream the files to yor hifi, too. I have not played the source discs to guard against the possibility that Vivid "wears off". I doubt if a disc is treated differently by a computer drive compared with a CD player drive, but am trying to treat the two discs equally in every respect. The "too large" disc images (made with "Disk Utility") are files served from my office computer. I cannot promise to change them until next week, being at home over the holiday with only a modem link. There just a chance I might get in there tomorrow, but would need to know exactly what to do in advance, not having a lot of time. Can you see any flaws in all that, Don? There is some leeway, starting with the "source CDs", which I have. Thanks to JV for time, Vivid, and postage! |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 202 Registered: Jun-04 | Can you see any flaws in all that, Don? It's fundamentally flawed, John. Unless I missed some posts re: Vivid, I had thought all along that the experiment was to determine whether the disc copy procedure would retain Vivid's enhancing qualities and transfer these onto a CD-R. By "source CD's", I meant the actual CD's from which the tracks were ripped. When I asked earlier whether the "source CD's" were treated with Vivid, I wanted to confirm that the glop had been applied on "Sgt. Pepper's", "Californication", "Dark Side Of The Moon", etc., before ripping the tracks and burning them onto a CD. Previous to that, I also wanted to confirm that those same tracks were ripped before applying Vivid. IMO, that's how it should have been done. So one CD-R would have contained tracks ripped pre-Vivid; the other ripped post-Vivid. With nothing to distinguish the two CD-R's except only by their names "Rex" and "Shep", the tester would have to trust only his/her ears to determine which one sounds "better." Did I miss something in the whole exercise? Please advise. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2673 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, Don. The procedure was about as good as I could think of without some Vivid of my own. Making two identical copies from a single master seems to me just as reasonable a way to go as "Before" and "After". One could think of different flaws in each approach. The other advantage of a treated disc and a "control" disc is that every track should be equally affected, or not, so people don't end up comparing genres. Making copies from one master copy is cheaper, too, and I do not end up with a collection of treated CDs, useless for further investigation, unless we can all agree about how to get the stuff off, without damage to the CD. You hoped for confirmation that Vivid had been applied to specific tracks, before writing to CD. This is not the way I would choose. In my protocol, Vivid has been applied to all tracks on only one of those CDs, and we do not know which. Any useful trial has to eliminate subjective bias, such as might come from expectations of one kind or another. With nothing to distinguish the two CD-R's except only by their names "Rex" and "Shep", the tester would have to trust only his/her ears to determine which one sounds "better." Isn't that the way to go? What we are after is whether one or other sounds better, and, if so, which. This way, everyone can have a go, irrespective of whether they already believe Vivid makes the sound better, makes it worse, or has no effect. |
|
Silver Member Username: OjophileON Post Number: 203 Registered: Jun-04 | Thanks, John. You hoped for confirmation that Vivid had been applied to specific tracks, before writing to CD. No, that's not what meant. That's not possible, let alone imagineable. What I meant was applying Vivid on the "Sgt. Pepper's" CD and then ripping off "A Day In The Life" onto your Mac's hard drive. You would then do the same for the other CD's and rip the corresponding tracks. From there, you would burn the tracks onto a CD-R. Etcetera, etcetera. I understand that you could end up with 12 Vivid-treated CD's that you may regret later on. But I raised that point because I recall that "true copy" being the gist of the whole disc-copy discussion several hundred posts back. Furthermore, I was thinking what one would normally do with Vivid and that is, to apply it on an original CD and then copy the CD and see if the real or perceived enhancement does carry over to the output CD-R. Anyway, thanks for your response and the links you've provided. My next reply or post (if ever) may be after Christmas as I still have some shopping and wrapping left to do. Please keep posting. Meanwhile, Happy Holidays! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2674 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, Don. I see what you mean, roughly: "How can we be sure that particular track received the treatment?" So making a copy of the disc before and after, then comparing copies, would be good. Probably separating individual tracks would be good, too. I will see what I can do next week. Have a good Christmas! |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | * BUON NATALE!!! * |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 732 Registered: Dec-03 | MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2678 Registered: Dec-03 | Grazie, J. Vigne. Buon Natale e un nuovo anno felice. To all contributors to this epic thread. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 347 Registered: Oct-04 | TO ALL: Mer and I wish you all a Happy Holiday season - full of happiness and prosperity. We're back home - Mer's dad is "broken but being fixed." He will recover most, but not all functions, and will be in therapy to help. Mer sends a cyber-hug to all - and we both look forward to another year of information, fun and comaraderie on the Olde Dawgs site - as well as Discoveries, etc. Thanks for all of your good wishes - and we send same to all. Will post more in the coming week - but for now - Peace! |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Heed the surrounding angels 'Angels live daily at our very elbows, and so do demons' Paul Crume / The Dallas Morning News This essay, first published on Christmas morning 1967, is considered one of the most appealing ever written by the late Paul Crume, whose "Big D" column appeared in The Dallas Morning News from 1948 until 1975. ************************************************ A man wrote me not long ago and asked me what I thought of the theory of angels. I immediately told him that I am highly in favor of angels. As a matter of fact, I am scared to death of them. Any adult human being with half sense, and some with more, knows that there are angels. If he has ever spent any period in loneliness, when the senses are forced in upon themselves, he has felt the wind from their beating wings and been overwhelmed with the sudden realization of the endless and gigantic dark that exists outside the little candle flame of human knowledge. He has prayed, not in the sense that he asked for something, but that he yielded himself. Angels live daily at our very elbows, and so do demons, and most men at one time or another in their lives have yielded themselves to both and have lived to rejoice and rue their impulses. But the man who has once felt the beat of an angel's wing finds it easy to rejoice at the universe and at his fellow man. It does not happen to any man often, and too many of us dismiss it when it happens. I remember a time in my final days in college when the chinaberry trees were abloom and the air was sweet with spring blossoms and I stood still on the street, suddenly struck with the feeling of something that was an enormous promise and yet was no tangible promise at all. And there was another night in a small boat when the moon was full and the distant headlands were dark but beautiful and we were lonely. The pull of a nameless emotion was so strong that it filled the atmosphere. The small boy within me cried. Psychiatrists will say that the angel in all this was really within me, not outside, but it makes no difference. There are angels inside us and angels outside, and the one inside is usually the quickest choked. Francis Thompson said it better. He was a late 19th-century English poet who would put the current crop of hippies to shame. He was on pot all his life. His pad was always mean and was sometimes a park bench. He was a mental case and tubercular besides. He carried a fishing creel into which he dropped the poetry that was later to become immortal. "The angels keep their ancient places," wrote Francis Thompson in protest. "Turn but a stone, and start a wing." He was lonely enough to be the constant associate of angels. There is an angel close to you this day. Merry Christmas, and I wish you well. |
|
Silver Member Username: Larry_rNaples, FL Post Number: 348 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan V. - Thank You! A wonderful column of thought for us all. Indeed, sir, I have felt the "beat of angel wings" many times in my life. A perfect "present" for this Holi-day. Most welcome, Jan! |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew York USA Post Number: 733 Registered: Dec-03 | Thank you Jan, and may you sleep well tonight. Larry & Mer-Welcome back and thank you for the kind wishes. Peace to all! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2682 Registered: Dec-03 | Boxing day bulletin, expanded from "Rate your hi-res discs here". We have discussed genres, and whether one or other can sound better in surroud sound than in stereo. Beethoven, The complete string quartets, The Lindsays, on CD, on "Resonance", the budget price label of Sanctuary Records Group Ltd. Astounding sound and performance (to judge from Op 18 Nos 1 and 2). Of the five complete cycles I now have, plus some parts from other quartets, this is the single one I could recommend without hesitation. Probably it is the original ASV cycle. It does not say that anywhere on the box, booklet, or discs, or on the web, or give the recording dates or locations. The named producers and recording engineers are consistent with it being the original ASV cycle. Probably, also, they have re-issued the original recordings on this budget label, reserving the new ones for premium-price and SACD. But they do not say that, either. I listened to some DVD-As before Christmas, and intended to come back with another recommendation of "hi-res". But CDs like these bring back the whole "hi-res" question. I am undecided. Again. Then there is the multi-channel question. If there are benefits of multi-channel for this sort of music, I should like to hear it. If the stereo recording is a good one (like these) it still cannot amount to much, surely? As before, if only "the industry" allowed true comparisons to be made, and let us know what it is we are listening to. If SACD and/or DVD-A are clearly and obviously superior to CD, why do the recording companies not simply release both, or all, formats, and let the listener decide whether he/she wishes to pay the premium price for the better product? (They could then just see how sales go, fire all their market researchers, and spend the money saved on something useful. The true Christmas spirit breaks through....). Having said all that, the EMI Rattle/BFO Mahler 5 is also astounding in DVD-A 5.1, and undeniably better than the two-channel version. But it is an entirely different genre to the String Quartet. On those stereo Beethoven CDs, there is a real sense of hearing the acoustic of the recording location, where the players are sitting, and so on. Much more than on some dry surround recordings. One again we come back to the question of what is it that we, and the engineers, are trying to achieve. It seems to me we can only answer the original question that started this thread when we can know what we are all trying to do, in the first place. I still can't see any way around that. BTW 1 "Sanctuary" Beethoven Qt. cycle enthusiastically recommended, and was Christmas gift from Mrs A. BTW 2 The quartets themselves were discussed in May and June on this thread and thanks to 2c, Don, and all others for views expressed there. Archive through May 06, 2004 Archive through June 19, 2004 |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 2683 Registered: Dec-03 | If Paul Crume's "Angels" are around, let them remind us constantly of our common humanity. And let us get rid of the "demons" who say otherwise. I wrote the above post on sound recordings before receiving any news this morning. I am now chastened by this terrible natural disaster in around the Eastern Indian Ocean. What problems does any of us have, here, in comparison? My heart goes out to the thousands upon thousands of poor people whose lives are devastated by the "Tsunami" early this morning, caused by a submarine earthquake off the Western coast of Sumatra. Fellow Old Dogs, even if we can do nothing, let us, at least, reflect on this event, and extend our human sympathy to any readers of this page from Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, India, The Maldives, Sri Lanka, and other affected countries and regions. |
|
Gold Member Username: KeggerMICHIGAN Post Number: 2051 Registered: Dec-03 | GHIA GOOD LUCK TODAY! The guy I'm playing had volek yesterday, so that's a good start! Let's just see if manning can get back on track! |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 557 Registered: Apr-04 | Yes, JohnA, the devastation by the tsunamis is horrific and heartbreaking. Kegger, thanks. I did win my game yesterday. While it was satisfying to win it all, watching the news reports of the tsunamis put it into perspective. I will be sending my winnings from the game ($125) to the Red Cross. Here's a link to agencies that will be providing assistance if anyone else is inclined to contribute: How to Help |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics