[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Remastered Music, to buy or not to buy (Dumb question)

[JerryS]

This is probably a really dumb question for such an expert forum, but
let's see if you can help. After spending most of my adult life
listening to classical music I became interested in Jazz after
retirement. Initially I bought cds and ripped these to flac. I then
discovered by abx testing that I can't tell the difference between flac
and mp3 (no surprise there as I am 70). This was great news since I can
now download mp3s from Amazon instantly, cheaper than the cds. I am not
an audophile, I like to listen to music rather than think too much about
the sound quality as long as it sounds 'ok' and don't understand many of
the technicalities discussed in this forum. The bulk of my jazz
collection was recorded between 1955 to the present. My questions are,
given the choice, should I be buying remastered or non-remastered music?
Am I likely to be able to hear the difference anyway since I can't tell
the difference between mp3 and flac? I suspect the answer will be "It
depends on a multitude of factors, including the quality of the
original, the skill of the remasterer, etc, etc". I am sure someone
will tell me to see if I can tell the difference, but, that is not
really an option unless I am willing to buy two of everything and keep
that which I prefer. Any thoughts or general guidelines? Don't get too
technical as I won't understand!

Thanks
Jerry


------------------------------------------------------------------------
JerryS's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38998
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[garym]

hard to answer this question. Some remastered albums sound better than
earlier versions and some sound worse. in the last decade or so, many
remastered albums have been remastered to be LOUDER and have less
dynamic compression. This is a bad thing. Google, "loudness wars" for
more on this. In the case of older jazz I often find that the remastered
versions have additional tracks included, etc. and often buy these
instead of the original release. But again, there is no "right" answer
here.



*Location 1:* VortexBox 4TB (2.3) > LMS 7.8 > Transporter, Touch, Boom,
Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio)
*Location 2:* VBA 3TB (2.3) > LMS 7.8 > Touch > Benchmark DAC I, Boom,
Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio)
*Office:* Win7(64) > LMS 7.8 > Squeezelite
*Spares:* several Touch, Radio, SB3
*Controllers:* iPhone4S & iPad2 (iPeng7 & Squeezepad), CONTROLLER, or
SqueezePlay 7.8 on Win7(64) laptop
*Files:* ripping: dbpoweramp > FLAC; post-rip: mp3tag, PerfectTunes;
Streaming: Spotify
------------------------------------------------------------------------
garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Wombat]

It is a gamble!
Many new masters even sold as so called "Studio Masters" sound worse as
their early cd version. Unfortunately you can't believe to much in some
listeners posting on forums talking about the quality they get horny by
some pointless DR numbers (to some degree) and bitrate. Worst is this
DSD crap imho, no one really needs this. CA comes me to mind here.
I am a bit cured from getting High Bitrate stuff. My last purchases were
only disappointments.
For example i got myself "Amigos" from Santana as 2014 Studio Master at
qobuz and this one sounds like a copy of a copy but with full frequency
spectrum, lol. My old cd sounds much better.
So until you don't read several good things about a new master written
in a way that make a comparison to the old version possible just stay
with the old cd.



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Mnyb]

Is it not a lot of music oriented and master oriented forums arround .
But even there opininons may vary .

The record companies does make it easier either , back in the day they
where out to make a quick buck . Now its a revered classic and where did
the master go .
A lot of master have been found in attics ,cellers storage of all kinds
and some not at all, some remasters are created from the only sources
avaible sometimes vinly or 78's ?

I think you have to research every work you plan to buy . Use Google a
lot there is always some <inset artist> entusiast somewhere who know
everything about his favorite .

Fyi the reason many uses lossles formats are not only for sound . They
are perfect copies good for archival its a copy of you CD . And you can
always make lossy mp3 or otherwise from those originals . Lossles files
can be tranfered to other formats without further losses . Tranfer an
mp3 to some other format and it will lose somehing in the process . This
computer world ,formats and application age vary fast , its a real
problem to migrate data to new formats .



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(in storage SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Gandhi]

Some people have problems hearing faint sounds, some have problems with
transients, some have problems with both. These are problems that many
people experience when they grow older and some even long before that.
All of these people would presumably actually *benefit* from the
loudness war. They would simply hear more of the music, without the pain
during the transients.

This is the same principle that makes music with low dynamics more easy
to listen to using only tiny computer speakers. Too faint and you can't
hear anything for the buzzing fan, too loud overloads the speakers.

(Like many others I experience listening fatigue when I listen to music
with low dynamics. But I haven't yet developed any hearing problems, I
think, so I prefer high dynamics just because I can.)



Best Regards,
Gandhi

not often enough well recorded and mastered cds *|* dbpoweramp with
accuraterip *|* flac *|* fanless asrock z77e-itx intel i5-3570t *|*
ubuntu 12.04.1 lts 32-bit *|* lms 7.8.0 *|* brutefirdrc 3.0 (rewv5) *|*
transporter (balanced out) *|* thule ia252b *|* audio physic scorpio *|*
no fancy cables. *+* also some booms. *+* harmony 525s for them all,
including waking the server from s3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gandhi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58909
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[probedb]

Gandhi wrote:
> They would simply hear more of the music

Why? The music is more dynamically compressed, it'd make it more
difficult to hear little nuances etc not easier, surely.



'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
probedb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7825
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Mnyb]

On topic again it is not a stupid question at all thankyou !

But easy answers may not be avaible .

The best answer yet is go for rhe oldest cd master of anything not very
precise may not always be true , but works often enough .

Next problem downloads .

It can be iTunes, Amazon or whatever . No one specifies their source
material properly which is a massive fail imo .
So you dont know what you get .
But if have to guess the download site have the latest master in many
cases loudness compressed crap .
Your luck here can be that your choice of genre may not be that
comercially interesting anymore . So the record company have not
remastered it at all :) so it can be ripped from a 90's CD in which case
your good.



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(in storage SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Gandhi]

probedb wrote:
> Why? The music is more dynamically compressed, it'd make it more
> difficult to hear little nuances etc not easier, surely.

It solves the problem of "can't crank up the volume to hear the softer
passages enough because the louder parts gives me pain, but can't turn
down the volume down enough to avoid the pain because then I can't hear
the softer sounds". More tunes for the buck. Amplitude differencies are
obviously scaled down (lost) in the process, but music also consists of
frequencies. Some might call that the most important part of music.
(Others may say the music is what happens between the notes.) But even
in Iggy Pop's most compressed work there are melodies to be heard.



Best Regards,
Gandhi

not often enough well recorded and mastered cds *|* dbpoweramp with
accuraterip *|* flac *|* fanless asrock z77e-itx intel i5-3570t *|*
ubuntu 12.04.1 lts 32-bit *|* lms 7.8.0 *|* brutefirdrc 3.0 (rewv5) *|*
transporter (balanced out) *|* thule ia252b *|* audio physic scorpio *|*
no fancy cables. *+* also some booms. *+* harmony 525s for them all,
including waking the server from s3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gandhi's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=58909
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Stratmangler]

I wouldn't have thought that many recordings in the Jazz idiom would be
badly aflicted by being remastered - the material isn't mainstream, and
it's unlikely to have been mistreated in the same way as Pop music has.
The Jazz audience wouldn't buy on a whim, unlike the consumers of the
rubbish we call Pop music today.
I grew up when there was real creativity in the pop genre - sadly not
the case today.



Chris :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stratmangler's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20387
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

Stratmangler wrote:
> I grew up when there was real creativity in the pop genre - sadly not
> the case today.

[image:
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/739/968/b5b.jpg]



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Stratmangler]

I was referring to the rubbish that gets thrown at us on TV and
mainstream radio.
There have always been interesting artists, but they usually find it
difficult to get mainstream exposure.

Julf wrote:
> [image:
> http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/739/968/b5b.jpg]



Chris :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stratmangler's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20387
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

Stratmangler wrote:
> I was referring to the rubbish that gets thrown at us on TV and
> mainstream radio.
> There have always been interesting artists, but they usually find it
> difficult to get mainstream exposure.

I agree about the mainstream rubbish, but at the same time streaming and
internet radio has made us less dependent on mainstream. Alternative
internet radio is now giving me much more choice and exposing me to more
interesting music than back in the day when I was dependent on local
radio stations and TV.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[cliveb]

Stratmangler wrote:
> I wouldn't have thought that many recordings in the Jazz idiom would be
> badly aflicted by being remastered - the material isn't mainstream, and
> it's unlikely to have been mistreated in the same way as Pop music has.
It isn't just mainstream stuff that gets mangled by dynamic range
compression. Most of my purchases are in the rock genre but nowhere
close to mainstream. And they are still over-compressed. It just seems
to be some kind of dogma these days to compress rock & pop this way.
Glad to see Ralph report that jazz is not affected in the same way.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

cliveb wrote:
> It isn't just mainstream stuff that gets mangled by dynamic range
> compression. Most of my purchases are in the rock genre but nowhere
> close to mainstream. And they are still over-compressed. It just seems
> to be some kind of dogma these days to compress rock & pop this way.
> Glad to see Ralph report that jazz is not affected in the same way.

What I do notice is that many new jazz releases and new jazz remasters,
while not featuring dynamic range compression, are mastered to play
louder. In other words, the dynamic range is still quite respectable but
the average overall volume is louder, kind of like the entire dynamic
range is shifted up a few db. I should also note that I do not listen to
smooth jazz so I don't know if this sub-genre suffers from the loudness
wars (which would be no big deal since smooth jazz suffers from ills and
musical sins which are much, much worse than dynamic range compression
:)).



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[matka]

ralphpnj wrote:
> What I do notice is that many new jazz releases and new jazz remasters,
> while not featuring dynamic range compression, are mastered to play
> louder...).
Would volume qualization even up a playing field ? Quite often I
construct playlists of the same work by diff performers on Spotify and
range of volume do not help in comparison. I do not use volume
equalization on squezzebox (subscribe to hear it as it was recorder or
remastered actually ?) and have it off on Spotify. Would turning it on
Spotify do more harm than good ?



George

Transporter->Pathos Logos->Triangle Celius
Touch->Yamaha RX-V673 -> Paradigm Monitor 7
2 Duets, 1 Boom, 1 SB3, 1 Touch, 1 Radio, Transporter
Samsung Galaxy IIS -> Sennheiser HD 380 Pro
2 servers -> Arch Linux, Ubuntu Linux
------------------------------------------------------------------------
matka's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34878
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[JerryS]

Thanks for all the replies, confirming my experience that this forum is
populated with extremely helpful people. As I suspected, no definitive
answers. In truth, I suspect that my 'cloth ears' are a blessing in
disguise since I haven't really noticed anything that sounds obviously
unpleasent in my somewhat clueless buying. I agree with the comment
that a lot more information from the distributor would be useful.
Sometimes on Amazon there are a dozen or more different choices of the
same album, with no indication of their provenance or attributes.

Yes, streaming makes some sense. Any suggestion as to which service
would offer the most comprehensive choice of jazz albums and how
comprehensive would this be compared say with Amazon digital download?
I ought to at least dip my toe in the 'stream' although it requires a
massive culture shift at my age and I would miss the ability to indulge
in obsessive tagging and play music with 'ordered randomness'.

Anyway, thanks for the advice.


Jerry


------------------------------------------------------------------------
JerryS's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=38998
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[matka]

JerryS wrote:
> ...Yes, streaming makes some sense. Any suggestion as to which service
> would offer the most comprehensive choice of jazz albums and how
> comprehensive would this be compared say with Amazon digital download?
> I ought to at least dip my toe in the 'stream' although it requires a
> massive culture shift at my age and I would miss the ability to indulge
> in obsessive tagging and play music with 'ordered randomness'.
>
> Anyway, thanks for the advice.
>
>
> Jerry
I would start with either Spotify or Google Music, the service is very
similar. It is "song" based but you can still search for Artist or even
producers (Rudy Van Gelder returns a lot of albums) and then play
albums. Google Music can be searched via browser even if you have not
signed on, so I would suggest to sign up with Spotify premium for a free
month and then double check if Google Music has albums that Spotify does
not carry. Cost is similar, so is streamng quality, both are 320 kbps.

Having said that, I must admint that my favourite is qobuz.com. Jazz and
Classical is very well reresented and service is oriented around
Performers and Albums, no "songs" here. You have a choice of mp3 320
kbps or flac streaming, also you can purchase flac donwloads (prices bit
higher than elsewhere). Website is rather annoying with constat
animation and it is in French, so I use Chrome to auto tranlate it.
Since I'm in a country that is not officially supported (Canada), once
I've set up an acocunt, I had to send them an email (in English) to
enable streaming setup, they were very prompt and set me up as if I was
in France. There are rumours that they are in financial trouble so I
would avoid yearly subscription. You can search on their website without
login.

All of these services have working squeezebox plug-ins and Premium
subscription that is free for a month. If I were you, I wold take each
of them in a sucession and eventually choose the one that suits you
best. Personally I have qobuz flac unlimited and Spotify, the later as a
backup if qobuz does not carry the title.



George

Transporter->Pathos Logos->Triangle Celius
Touch->Yamaha RX-V673 -> Paradigm Monitor 7
2 Duets, 1 Boom, 1 SB3, 1 Touch, 1 Radio, Transporter
Samsung Galaxy IIS -> Sennheiser HD 380 Pro
2 servers -> Arch Linux, Ubuntu Linux
------------------------------------------------------------------------
matka's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34878
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[RonM]

cliveb wrote:
> It isn't just mainstream stuff that gets mangled by dynamic range
> compression. Most of my purchases are in the rock genre but nowhere
> close to mainstream. And they are still over-compressed. It just seems
> to be some kind of dogma these days to compress rock & pop this way.
> Glad to see Ralph report that jazz is not affected in the same way.

As noted, increased compression means louds and softs are closer in
volume. This actually has a reasonable purpose, under some conditions.

A great many people are listening to music under less than ideal
circumstances, often through mobile devices, using cheap earbuds, in
public places with lots of ambient noise. Under these conditions
quieter bits in the music may become lost in the surrounding crush of
sound. Compressed music is an improvement in some ways, as it means the
quiet bits aren't quite as quiet, there is less dynamic range.

Of course, this is a real liability when you are listening to music in
better (quieter) circumstances, with better equipment, when the loss of
dynamic range can seem like a tragedy.

On the question of remasters, my experience is that "older" music is
generally improved by remastering. Even some that's not actually all
that old. For instance, I've been listening to the Allman Brothers Band
from the 1971 Fillmore East recordings. These have been recently
released in high-res sound, in their entirety, on a Blu-Ray DVD. I
really like the remastering that has been done, very high quality. Of
course, the whole project is utterly redundant except for totally
die-hard ABB fans. It has five separate concerts, with largely
overlapping setlists, so you get five almost the same versions of some
of the tracks. The best versions have been released in a 2-CD package,
also remastered in recent years. But it's been a lot of fun anyway, and
the 43-year-old music sounds very fresh in these remasters.

Jazz fans might even like it!



LMS on a dedicated music server (FitPC2)
Transporter (ethernet) - main music listening, Onkyo receiver, Paradigm
speakers
Duet (wifi) - home theatre 5.1, Sony receiver, Energy speakers
Boom 1 (wifi) - workspace
Boom 2 (wifi) - various (deck, garage, etc.)
Radio (wifi) - home office
Touch x 2 - awaiting deployment
UE Radio - awaiting deployment
Control - 2 Controllers (main listening, home theatre, all others),
Squeeze Remote (on Surface Pro 2), Music2Touch (BB Playbook)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[cliveb]

RonM wrote:
> As noted, increased compression means louds and softs are closer in
> volume. This actually has a reasonable purpose, under some conditions.
>
> A great many people are listening to music under less than ideal
> circumstances, often through mobile devices, using cheap earbuds, in
> public places with lots of ambient noise. Under these conditions
> quieter bits in the music may become lost in the surrounding crush of
> sound. Compressed music is an improvement in some ways, as it means the
> quiet bits aren't quite as quiet, there is less dynamic range.
Quite so. But as you say, compression is desirable in some circumstances
- BUT NOT ALL!

To inflict compression on the source material for the benefit of those
who listen in noisy environments penalises those who listen at home. And
the solution is painfully obvious: PUT THE COMPRESSOR IN THE PLAYBACK
DEVICE so the listener has the choice. This isn't rocket science.
Rockbox firmware has had an optional compressor for years. The Rio Karma
had an AGC way back even before that.

What the industry needs is for Apple to add one to iPods and iPhones for
the mainstream to sit up and take notice. But even that may be too late
- I fear that a whole generation of mastering "engineers" has grown up
believing that excessive dynamic compression is the right thing to do.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[dafiend]

^^^ +1


------------------------------------------------------------------------
dafiend's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=60637
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

cliveb wrote:
> Quite so. But as you say, compression is desirable in some circumstances
> - BUT NOT ALL!
>
> To inflict compression on the source material for the benefit of those
> who listen in noisy environments penalises those who listen at home. And
> the solution is painfully obvious: PUT THE COMPRESSOR IN THE PLAYBACK
> DEVICE so the listener has the choice. This isn't rocket science.
> Rockbox firmware has had an optional compressor for years. The Rio Karma
> had an AGC way back even before that.
>
> What the industry needs is for Apple to add one to iPods and iPhones for
> the mainstream to sit up and take notice. But even that may be too late
> - I fear that a whole generation of mastering "engineers" has grown up
> believing that excessive dynamic compression is the right thing to do.

Clive you inadvertently touched on one of the dirty little secrets of
dynamic range compression: it has/had been going on for years and years
in the field of radio broadcasting and for the exact same reason, namely
that dynamically compressed music sounds better in a noisy environment,
like an automobile. The more recent development is the use of dynamic
range compression on the recording itself and not as something added
during playback. Don't like dynamic range compression then listen to
jazz or classical music, both of feature lots of music offered in full,
uncompressed glory. Just about all current "popular" music (which is
basically anything that's not jazz, classical or few other even less
popular genres) features some degree of dynamic range compression, with
the basic axiom being the more popular the music the more compressed the
dynamic range. Just one more reason not to listen to U2 (as if I needed
another reason).



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[darrenyeats]

I used to rail against all compression but sometimes it's fitting, if
done well, in certain genres. It's not welcome necessarily, but it
doesn't spell death for an album for me. Especially if certain elements
in the mix are compressed and others not. If Busta Rhymes bass kicks and
Two Door Cinema club pops and bounces then perhaps that's okay after
all!

However, I'm totally against compressed remasters, radio stations, any
process that applies compression indiscriminately. As Clive and Ralph
discuss, there are better solutions available.



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503.

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

darrenyeats wrote:
> I used to rail against all compression but sometimes it's fitting, if
> done well, in certain genres.

And we have to keep in mind that heavy compression and distortion has
been an essential element in all modern electric guitar music since at
least Chuck Berry...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[darrenyeats]

Good point.



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503.

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[cliveb]

darrenyeats wrote:
> I used to rail against all compression but sometimes it's fitting, if
> done well, in certain genres. It's not welcome necessarily, but it
> doesn't spell ruin. Especially if certain elements in the mix are
> compressed and others not. If Busta Rhymes bass kicks and Two Door
> Cinema Club pops and bounces then perhaps it's okay!
I agree that appropriate compression is often necessary and has been
used for decades on rock and pop as a way of bringing recordings to
life. (Jazz as well, I dare say). But what started in the early 1990's
and has been getting worse ever since is *excessive* compression.

darrenyeats wrote:
> A good, well set up system should handle most of what's thrown at it
> with a reasonable amount of grace IMHO. A system can't or shouldn't try
> to fill in what's missing but I like my favourite music to be at least
> somewhat listenable even when not recorded very well.
It would be great if a system could make dire recordings sound good
while not trashing good recordings. But the two goals are mutually
exclusive. An accurate system that reveals good recordings in all their
glory ruthlessly exposes the dog's dinner that is modern hypercompressed
music.

Example: my wife recently bought the album Night Visions by Imagine
Dragons, which is sort-of OK-ish on a portable player or in the car (if
you like their music), but on our main system (which sounds wonderful
when fed decent recordings) it is a catastrophic train wreck.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

cliveb wrote:
> I agree that appropriate compression is often necessary and has been
> used for decades on rock and pop as a way of bringing recordings to
> life. (Jazz as well, I dare say). But what started in the early 1990's
> and has been getting worse ever since is *excessive* compression.

Amazingly no one has yet mentioned that in order for a recording with a
highly compressed dynamic range to sound good one MUST obtain a 24 bit
version (or even a 32 bit version) since those extra 8 bits provide for
approximately 50% more dynamic range (16 bit audio - 96 dB of dynamic
range versus 24 bit audio - 144 dB of dynamic range and 144 - 96 = 48,
which is 50% of 96).

So Franz Ferdinand in 16 bit sounds terrible but that same recording at
24 bit sounds wonderful. So imagine just how good it will sound on a 32
bit version.

And who says I don't have a firm grasp of the principles of digital
audio? As you can plainly see from the above paragraphs I have at least
as much knowledge of digital audio as any one who currently writes for
or edits any of the high end audio magazines. ;)



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[probedb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Amazingly no one has yet mentioned that in order for a recording with a
> highly compressed dynamic range to sound good one MUST obtain a 24 bit
> version (or even a 32 bit version) since those extra 8 bits provide for
> approximately 50% more dynamic range (16 bit audio - 96 dB of dynamic
> range versus 24 bit audio - 144 dB of dynamic range and 144 - 96 = 48,
> which is 50% of 96).
>
> So Franz Ferdinand in 16 bit sounds terrible but that same recording at
> 24 bit sounds wonderful. So imagine just how good it will sound on a 32
> bit version.
>
> And who says I don't have a firm grasp of the principles of digital
> audio? As you can plainly see from the above paragraphs I have at least
> as much knowledge of digital audio as any one who currently writes for
> or edits any of the high end audio magazines. ;)

Except you know that a dB scale isn't linear so 96 isn't double 48
afaik. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel

I do hope the part about 16/24/32 was a joke.



'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
probedb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7825
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

probedb wrote:
> I do hope the part about 16/24/32 was a joke.

I am assuming the whole posting was 100% joke/irony.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> I am assuming the whole posting was 100% joke/irony.

As I just responded to probedb, yes it was meant as a joke but it is
really hard to make a joke about something that it is itself one big
joke. While you and many other of my fellow forum members might
instantly recognize the joke, unfortunately most audiophiles would not
see anything wrong with my post and in fact would gladly believe it and
spend money on 24 bit versions of modern recordings with minimal dynamic
range.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> As I just responded to probedb, yes it was meant as a joke but it is
> really hard to make a joke about something that it is itself one big
> joke. While you and many other of my fellow forum members might
> instantly recognize the joke, unfortunately most audiophiles would not
> see anything wrong with my post and in fact would gladly believe it and
> spend money on 24 bit versions of modern recordings with minimal dynamic
> range.

I agree - and of course 32 bit floating point must be better than 24 bit
integer, as more is better...



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> I agree - and of course 32 bit floating point must be better than 24 bit
> integer, as more is better...

Only if it is DSD.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

probedb wrote:
> Except you know that a dB scale isn't linear so 96 isn't double 48
> afaik. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel
>
> I do hope the part about 16/24/32 was a joke.

Sure it was a joke but similar nonsense has been printed in the high end
audio press and no matter how many times it is shown that increasing the
bit depth of a digital audio recording DOES NOT increase the dynamic
range of the recording the nonsense just continues to snowball out of
control. But then again, as stated by Julf (I believe), high end audio
is now a luxury goods market and there is no group on earth that ignores
science more than the wealthy buyers in any luxury goods market.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[probedb]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Sure it was a joke but similar nonsense has been printed in the high end
> audio press and no matter how many times it is shown that increasing the
> bit depth of a digital audio recording DOES NOT increase the dynamic
> range of the recording the nonsense just continues to snowball out of
> control. But then again, as stated by Julf (I believe), high end audio
> is now a luxury goods market and there is no group on earth that ignores
> science more than the wealthy buyers in any luxury goods market.

Yes, sorry, there's so many people that love to spout nonsense you have
to work out who does and who doesn't ;)

Just for fun....
http://hometheaterreview.com/ps-audio-directstream-network-audio-player-and-dac/

Why? Why would you convert everything to DSD?



'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
probedb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7825
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

probedb wrote:
> Why? Why would you convert everything to DSD?

Because it is "more analog" and doesn't have the "nasty digital-sounding
stair-steps" of PCM.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Mnyb]

Julf wrote:
> Because it is "more analog" and doesn't have the "nasty digital-sounding
> stair-steps" of PCM.

Star steps that does not even exist ! :) see ( monthy's video on
xiph.org about that btw ) . They are used in visualisatiosn and is an
intemediate in some dac designs..



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(in storage SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

probedb wrote:
> Why? Why would you convert everything to DSD?

Julf wrote:
> Because it is "more analog" and doesn't have the "nasty digital-sounding
> stair-steps" of PCM.

And because if not for the interest in DSD in the high end audio
community DSD would be a dead format and high end audio loves nothing
more than zombie formats.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

Mnyb wrote:
> Star steps that does not even exist ! :)

Which is why I mentioned them. Since when has non-existence of something
been a hindrance to audiophiles? :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

Mnyb wrote:
> Star steps that does not even exist !

Julf wrote:
> Which is why I mentioned them. Since when has non-existence of something
> been a hindrance to audiophiles? :)

Gentlemen,

Of course stair steps exist but it takes a well trained golden ear in
order to hear them. Remember picosecond jitter, which is also said to be
well beyond the human brain and ear's ability to hear, can indeed be
heard by a well trained golden ear:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/ps-audio-and-ted-smith-jitter

So Julf I think your statement should be revised to read: Since when has
*-the supposed*- non-existence of something been a hindrance to
audiophiles?



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> So Julf I think your statement should be revised to read: Since when has
> *-the supposed*- non-existence of something been a hindrance to
> audiophiles?

No, I'll revise it to "But music is *art*. It is about emotions and
inner feelings. What would some bloody scientists and engineers know
about that? They are too blinded by their measuring gear to see *life*?

Yes, :)



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> No, I'll revise it to "But music is *art*. It is about emotions and
> inner feelings. What would some bloody scientists and engineers know
> about that? They are too blinded by their measuring gear to see
> *life*?"
>
> Yes, :)

True that music is art, however high end audio is all about money, lots
and lots of money, and getting audiophiles to part with their money. If
claiming to hear picosecond jitter or PCM stair steps causes audiophiles
to open their wallets, well then why not make such claims.

I have no doubt that many, if not most, of the mega-buck DACs available
do indeed offer a very high level of performance and great sound but
there seems to be this giant disconnect between what is in reality a
very small improvement and the various claims that these small
improvements are "night and day differences" that will "blow the
listener away". By the way, the same can be said for most audiophile
label remasterings - sure they may sound marginally better but more
often than not this slight improvement does not justify the super high
price of the recording.

Just remember this handy little motto which I may try to trademark and
sell to the various high end audio manufacturers and magazines:

*DSD IS JITTER FREE!!™*



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> *DSD IS JITTER FREE!!™*

No, it isn't. It actually requires very expensive USB cables to deal
with the jitter.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Wombat]

Only 2 things to this dsd thing. If there is a format prone to jitter it
must be dsd. I forgot where but i did read a simple explanation that
jitter is more a problem with it as with PCM.
Also i have the feeling people who upsample to dsd don't realize that in
this PCM to dsd process you need to apply a hard lowpass exactly like
with upsampling to higher PCM.



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

Julf wrote:
> No, it isn't. It actually requires very expensive USB cables to deal
> with the jitter.

True and don't forget the mega-buck asynchronous USB, DSD capable,
upsampling, tube DAC with a front panel made from a solid billet of
aircraft grade aluminum without which you will be overwhelmed with
jitter laden, stair stepped PCM garbage. Oh I almost forget the iMac
computer/laptop filled with untagged aiff files (for that poor
unfortunate music yet to be made available in glorious DSD) and untagged
DSD files,which is of course connected to the DAC with a very expensive
USB cable. Plus you will also need an iPad to run the basically unusable
control app.

Wombat wrote:
> Only 2 things to this dsd thing. If there is a format prone to jitter it
> must be dsd. I forgot where but i did read a simple explanation that
> jitter is more a problem with it as with PCM.
> Also i have the feeling people who upsample to dsd don't realize that in
> this PCM to dsd process you need to apply a hard lowpass exactly like
> with upsampling to higher PCM.

There you go again trying to bring facts, science and logic into a
perfectly good audiophile discussion. When will you ever learn?



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Wombat]

ralphpnj wrote:
>
> There you go again trying to bring facts, science and logic into a
> perfectly good audiophile discussion. When will you ever learn?
My bad, sorry :(



Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

ralphpnj wrote:
> There you go again trying to bring facts, science and logic into a
> perfectly good audiophile discussion. When will you ever learn?

Wombat wrote:
> My bad, sorry :(

All kidding aside, most of my joking is based on things I have read and
seen in real audiophile magazines and on real audiophile web sites. For
example, the otherwise excellent Head-fi.org forum has the following
three sub-sections in order to prevent the kinds of flame wars my
anti-audiophile rants often ignite:

Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) - filled
with audiophile voodoo and other nonsense.

High-end Audio Forum - filled with unquestioning worship of all things
deemed worthy by the high end audio gods.

Sound Science - a small place of refuse from the madness of the above
two sub-sections.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

ralphpnj wrote:
> Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) - filled
> with audiophile voodoo and other nonsense.

Why can't they be honest and label it "science-free"?



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[cliveb]

Julf wrote:
> Because it is "more analog" and doesn't have the "nasty digital-sounding
> stair-steps" of PCM.
Surely DSD is *more digital* - it only has a single possible output
voltage which it switches on & off very rapidly.
At least PCM has multiple voltages (65536 for 16 bit, 16777216 for 24
bit), so it's closer to analogue.

:-) for anyone who thinks I'm serious, BTW.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[pablolie]

i have done it several times, and i shall desist henceforth. anything
recorded before a certain time honestly deserves 256k MP3 at most. and a
lot of them don't even deserve that. i still very much enjoy the music.

example: waltz for debby by bill evans. brilliant. one of favorite
albums of all time. no way i can tell the difference between my original
CD, which i ripped to both 320k MP3 and FLAC (and both sound the same),
and the new remastered 24bit 192k version, which is just a bit louder,
but provides no additional resolution. waste of money.



...pablo
Server: Virtual Machine running Ubuntu 12.04 + LMS 7.7.3 on VMware
Player
System: SB Touch --optical->- Benchmark DAC2HGC --AnalysisPlus Oval
Copper XLR->- Creek Destiny Power Amp --AnalysisPlus Black Mesh Oval->-
KEF LS50
Other Rooms: 2x SB Boom; 1x SB Radio; 1x SB Classic-> MusicalFidelity
M1PWR -> Totem DreamCatcher
Computer audio: workstation --USB->- audioengine D1 -> Grado PS500e
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[atrocity]

pablolie wrote:
> example: waltz for debby by bill evans. brilliant. one of favorite
> albums of all time. no way i can tell the difference between my original
> CD, which i ripped to both 320k MP3 and FLAC (and both sound the same),
> and the new remastered 24bit 192k version, which is just a bit louder,
> but provides no additional resolution. waste of money.

There's one technical advantage to FLAC, though: Because each FLAC file
has a built-in checksum, it's possible to validate the integrity of a
FLAC library fairly easily.

(Yeah, I was just playing around learning shell scripts and hit on that
idea...)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
atrocity's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16009
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[pablolie]

atrocity wrote:
> There's one technical advantage to FLAC, though: Because each FLAC file
> has a built-in checksum, it's possible to validate the integrity of a
> FLAC library fairly easily.
>
> (Yeah, I was just playing around learning shell scripts and hit on that
> idea...)

Integrity is relative. There are always corner cases where checksums
will not be able to ensure it entirely (sorry to worry you). best
practice, as always - early backups, ongoing integrity checks. ripping
is such a brutal process... never ever want to do it again.



...pablo
Server: Virtual Machine running Ubuntu 12.04 + LMS 7.7.3 on VMware
Player
System: SB Touch --optical->- Benchmark DAC2HGC --AnalysisPlus Oval
Copper XLR->- Creek Destiny Power Amp --AnalysisPlus Black Mesh Oval->-
KEF LS50
Other Rooms: 2x SB Boom; 1x SB Radio; 1x SB Classic-> MusicalFidelity
M1PWR -> Totem DreamCatcher
Computer audio: workstation --USB->- audioengine D1 -> Grado PS500e
------------------------------------------------------------------------
pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Julf]

pablolie wrote:
> Integrity is relative. There are always corner cases where checksums
> will not be able to ensure it entirely (sorry to worry you). best
> practice, as always - early backups, ongoing integrity checks.

I agree - but the checksums are still a pretty good indicator. If all
the files in your collection have OK checksums, they most likely are OK.
If some have checksum errors, then something nasty has happened to your
collection, and all of them need to be verifies.

> ripping is such a brutal process... never ever want to do it again.

Ripping itself is easy - just automate it, and keep swapping CDs in the
drive whenever you go past anyway. The hard work is in making sure the
tags are OK.



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[atrocity]

pablolie wrote:
> Integrity is relative. There are always corner cases where checksums
> will not be able to ensure it entirely (sorry to worry you). best
> practice, as always - early backups, ongoing integrity checks. ripping
> is such a brutal process... never ever want to do it again.

Yes, there's a tiny, tiny chance that you'll hit a case where the
checksum doesn't help. Buy it's something, as opposed to lossy formats
which, as far as I know, have nothing.

And I agree about the ripping...it took me a year and a half! I have
onsite and offsite backups and now that I know how to automate the
integrity checks, I just need to figure out how often I want to schedule
them. I tested with a 40,724 track subset and it still took around 36
hours.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
atrocity's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16009
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[cliveb]

Lots of valid answers, but I see nobody has yet addressed one of Jerry's
initial questions:

JerryS wrote:
> ... should I be buying remastered or non-remastered music? Am I likely
> to be able to hear the difference anyway since I can't tell the
> difference between mp3 and flac?
Inability to hear a difference between MP3 and FLAC has very little to
do with your age. Well made MP3s are audibly indistinguishable from the
original for most listeners, regardless of their hearing acuity.

Remasters, on the other hand, almost always obviously sound different to
the previous version, regardless of whether you get them as MP3 or CD.
Note that I said *different*, not *better*. And as many others have
pointed out, it's hit and miss whether you will prefer the original or
the remaster.



Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[matka]

JerryS wrote:
> ... My questions are, given the choice, should I be buying remastered or
> non-remastered music? Am I likely to be able to hear the difference
> anyway since I can't tell the difference between mp3 and flac? ...
>
> Thanks
> Jerry
Since nobody can seriously give you a definitive answer, I would suggest
this - stop buying, start streaming.

Luckilly, you already have a server running that can stream from qobuz
(flac, mp3, good classical and jazz catalogue) and spotify (highest ogg)
and google play (320 mp3). Spotify will cost you $10, qobuz 20 EUR,
google under $10. Quite often you can listen to the original version
and to the remeastered version (latest Callas for example). You could
make up your mind which version you like best and then decide to buy or
download.

This comparison nirvana (I like creating playlist of the same classical
work by anumber of artists and then compare them) is something that was
not feasible before streaming arrived, if you are not billionaire that
is, now it is possible and inexpensive. As a result, in the last year, I
bought maybe a couple of CD's of material that I could not stream.

I'm silently lurking on rmcr classical recordng forum and can't get over
the fact that people don't appreciate streaming there (even if on a PC
or smartphone, squeezebox is beyond average member capacity to handle),
they constantly talk about what version they own and how to import the
next version from Japan or Germany. You don't have to do that, save your
money.



George

Transporter->Pathos Logos->Triangle Celius
Touch->Yamaha RX-V673 -> Paradigm Monitor 7
2 Duets, 1 Boom, 1 SB3, 1 Touch, 1 Radio, Transporter
Samsung Galaxy IIS -> Sennheiser HD 380 Pro
2 servers -> Arch Linux, Ubuntu Linux
------------------------------------------------------------------------
matka's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=34878
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[Mnyb]

matka wrote:
> Since nobody can seriously give you a definitive answer, I would suggest
> this - stop buying, start streaming.
>
> Luckilly, you already have a server running that can stream from qobuz
> (flac, mp3, good classical and jazz catalogue) and spotify (highest ogg)
> and google play (320 mp3). Spotify will cost you $10, qobuz 20 EUR,
> google under $10. Quite often you can listen to the original version
> and to the remeastered version (latest Callas for example). You could
> make up your mind which version you like best and then decide to buy or
> download.
>
> This comparison nirvana (I like creating playlist of the same classical
> work by anumber of artists and then compare them) is something that was
> not feasible before streaming arrived, if you are not billionaire that
> is, now it is possible and inexpensive. As a result, in the last year, I
> bought maybe a couple of CD's of material that I could not stream.
>
> I'm silently lurking on rmcr classical recordng forum and can't get over
> the fact that people don't appreciate streaming there (even if on a PC
> or smartphone, squeezebox is beyond average member capacity to handle),
> they constantly talk about what version they own and how to import the
> next version from Japan or Germany. You don't have to do that, save your
> money.

Another suggestion would be to become a cybercriminal at advanced age :)
if your really curious at something no streaming service offers just
download it from xxxxxxxxxxxx (hey i dont want to break forum rules ) as
a torrent .
IF you decide its a keeper just buy from a legal outlet if it's even
available .

Note, really old stuff or otherwise commercially unavailable , might
only be available as LP-rips at torrent sites .The chaps there record
the outputs from their turntables .
Heck some of that would already bee in the public domain ?



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(in storage SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[ralphpnj]

JerryS wrote:
> This is probably a really dumb question for such an expert forum, but
> let's see if you can help. After spending most of my adult life
> listening to classical music I became interested in Jazz after
> retirement. Initially I bought cds and ripped these to flac. I then
> discovered by abx testing that I can't tell the difference between flac
> and mp3 (no surprise there as I am 70). This was great news since I can
> now download mp3s from Amazon instantly, cheaper than the cds. I am not
> an audophile, I like to listen to music rather than think too much about
> the sound quality as long as it sounds 'ok' and don't understand many of
> the technicalities discussed in this forum. The bulk of my jazz
> collection was recorded between 1955 to the present. My questions are,
> given the choice, should I be buying remastered or non-remastered music?
> Am I likely to be able to hear the difference anyway since I can't tell
> the difference between mp3 and flac? I suspect the answer will be "It
> depends on a multitude of factors, including the quality of the
> original, the skill of the remasterer, etc, etc". I am sure someone
> will tell me to see if I can tell the difference, but, that is not
> really an option unless I am willing to buy two of everything and keep
> that which I prefer. Any thoughts or general guidelines? Don't get too
> technical as I won't understand!
>
> Thanks
> Jerry

Stratmangler wrote:
> I wouldn't have thought that many recordings in the Jazz idiom would be
> badly aflicted by being remastered - the material isn't mainstream, and
> it's unlikely to have been mistreated in the same way as Pop music has.
> The Jazz audience wouldn't buy on a whim, unlike the consumers of the
> rubbish we call Pop music today.
> I grew up when there was real creativity in the pop genre - sadly not
> the case today.

As an avid jazz fan, listener and collector who has been enjoying jazz
for over 40 years I have to wholeheartedly agree with Stratmangler in
that most jazz remasters do not suffer the same "loudness" fate as
popular music remasters. As has been stated jazz remasters often include
extra tracks and alternated takes so they are often very worthwhile, in
addition most older jazz, i.e. from before the introduction of the long
playing LP, was originally released on 78rpm records and is now
available on single and multi disc compilations, for example the 3 disc
Duke Ellington release "The Blanton-Webster Band" which collects
recordings made in the late 1930s and early 1940s, and many of these
collections are quite enjoyable.

I also think that matka's streaming suggestion is a very good idea since
it will enable you explore many of the side roads that jazz listening
offers. What I mean is that for example you might be listening to a
Miles Davis recording and discover that you enjoy the playing of one of
the sidemen. With a streaming service you can look for and listen to
some of the other recordings by or featuring that musician.

By the way, if you any questions on jazz or would like a few
recommendations please send me a PM.



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391

[jh901]

JerryS wrote:
> My questions are, given the choice, should I be buying remastered or
> non-remastered music?

If you are genuinely curious, then the short answer is that the
mastering engineer is what matters. If you enjoy some Sony Legacy back
catalog of reissues mastered by Vic Anesini, for example, then you will
likely be pleased with his other projects.


JerryS wrote:
> Am I likely to be able to hear the difference anyway since I can't
> tell the difference between mp3 and flac?

Apples and oranges. That said, the more capable your gear and
expectations are, the more likely that you'll enjoy better mastering
work.


I'd recommend signing up to the Steve Hoffman forum and sort of search
around for threads discussing sound quality of albums which most
interest you. I know a little bit about jazz and rock mastering
quality, so I can try to point you in the right direction.



Cary Audio 306 SACD Pro | Cary Audio SLP-05 | Cary Audio SA-200.2 |
Focal Diablo Utopia III
__Acoustic treatment: DIY Cylinder Bass traps | "Rule of Thirds" for
speaker & sweet spot position
__Speaker Cables: Analysis Plus Big Silver Oval | Shunyata Venom series
power cords and power conditioning
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=102391