Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Tech Talk
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - New decade, end of the CD?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedNew decade, end of the CD?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 57>
Author
Message
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 09:53
I don't know the technical reason, it's maybe due to a jitter issue.



Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 09:54
Confused I'm out.
What?
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 09:57

Some new elements:

"Power supply design, grounding, can affect the quality of these cloks, and audiophile CD transport designers pay special attention to the power supply. A poor power supply can affect the remant jitter both by contaminating the crystal clock, and the AES/EBU trasmitter in the digital output stage. Until someone examines the internal mechanisms of both reproduction systems with very sophisticated measurement equipment, we can only hypothesize. But for now, it is enough to say that the measured intrinsic jitter of a DAT reproducer is greater than 100 times the jitter of a good CD transport. We all know that shouldn't be happening... all digital reproducers should measure perfectly--right? Good thing we are able to measure those differences, or the golden ears would all be in a pickle trying to demonstrate why DAT playback just doesn't sound as good as CD playback"

You understand that the DAT quoted in this article & the CD ROM part from your computer may be similar in this optic.

EDIT: that's why i explained that us audiophiles separate our CD source from the rest of our devices in order to avoid the specific kind of CD deck's power supplies to reject electric pollution to the others elements of the system. Imagine your CD ROM deck within your computer. It shares its power supply with all the other elements of the computer. So it's extremely polluted. That's the reason of being of home burners.
But of course these differences can be heard only on a transparent system.






Source:

http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitter-a-clarification-of-my-article.html

Edited by oliverstoned - April 05 2011 at 11:35
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 12:31
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:


Some new elements:

"Power supply design, grounding, can affect the quality of these cloks, and audiophile CD transport designers pay special attention to the power supply. A poor power supply can affect the remant jitter both by contaminating the crystal clock, and the AES/EBU trasmitter in the digital output stage. Until someone examines the internal mechanisms of both reproduction systems with very sophisticated measurement equipment, we can only hypothesize. But for now, it is enough to say that the measured intrinsic jitter of a DAT reproducer is greater than 100 times the jitter of a good CD transport. We all know that shouldn't be happening... all digital reproducers should measure perfectly--right? Good thing we are able to measure those differences, or the golden ears would all be in a pickle trying to demonstrate why DAT playback just doesn't sound as good as CD playback"

You understand that the DAT quoted in this article & the CD ROM part from your computer may be similar in this optic.

EDIT: that's why i explained that us audiophiles separate our CD source from the rest of our devices in order to avoid the specific kind of CD deck's power supplies to reject electric pollution to the others elements of the system. Imagine your CD ROM deck within your computer. It shares its power supply with all the other elements of the computer. So it's extremely polluted. That's the reason of being of home burners.
But of course these differences can be heard only on a transparent system.

Source:

http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitter-a-clarification-of-my-article.html
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Jitter affects playback only - it has no effect on recording - it does not matter one iota if the clock during recording is a solid as the Rock of Gibralter of wandering around like a drunk on St. Patrick's Day - the data stream and its encryption is constant and not related to clock speed or stability. Therefore it makes no difference where the disc was recorded or on what equipment. Playback, as the quote says, is different and is affected by jitter -signal-to-noise is directly proportional to jitter  - that's scientific and engineering fact, we even have a mathematical forumula for it:
SNR = 20 × log [1/(π × input frequency × Tj)]
 
where: Tj is the Jitter Time 
HOWEVER - no CD Player, even those in PCs, convert the data directly off of the read-lazer into analogue - they all read in to a FIFO RAM buffer before the DAC converter, so the CD platter jitter is essentially elimianted from the DAC conversion.
 
As I said - I'm out. Geek


Edited by Dean - April 05 2011 at 12:33
What?
Back to Top
ProgBob View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 02 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 202
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 12:37
^

(Edit: Dean got in before me but this is in response to the post before his).

I really think we need to define what is being compared with what here.

If you are talking about playing a CD on a computer's CD-ROM drive and using the output from the sound card then yes I can accept that there is potential for a lot of noise to be picked up.

If however we are using the computer as a server, as a source of digital files that have previously been ripped accurately and are provided to an external DAC via wi-fi or an ethernet cable (such as happens in the Squeezebox touch that I mentioned), then that DAC is receiving a bit perfect copy of the content of the CD. It can't get any better than this. The first limiting factor from there is the quality of the DAC.

As for comparing a burned copy of a CD with the original, then if they sound different on the same CD player it can only because the original rip was not successful (using EAC, or DBPoweramp with AccurateRip can eliminate this possibility), or one or the other of the CD's is not playing properly on the CD player.  If this really is an issue - and I must admit I am dubious - then again it points to using a computer as a more reliable source of the digitised music.

BTW I am all for buying music on CD and using it as my primary backup but I see few advantages in continuing to use the physical CD in order to hear its content.


Edited by ProgBob - April 05 2011 at 12:38
Bob
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 12:37
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

I don't know the technical reason, it's maybe due to a jitter issue.

That still wouldn't manifest as "harshness" - more like a swirly distortion in the high frequencies. I had jitter issues with a Line 6 sound card years ago (USB driver problems), and I used tracks that featured violin solos because they clearly exposed those issues.

The point is that even if you're experiencing such problems, it's due to a clearly faulty copy. If the digital copy is accurate (and it is if you use a modern computer and modern software) then when you play it back there can be no difference to the original, independent of what player you use and how transparent the system is.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 12:43
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:



EDIT: that's why i explained that us audiophiles separate our CD source from the rest of our devices in order to avoid the specific kind of CD deck's power supplies to reject electric pollution to the others elements of the system. Imagine your CD ROM deck within your computer. It shares its power supply with all the other elements of the computer. So it's extremely polluted. That's the reason of being of home burners.
But of course these differences can be heard only on a transparent system.

Source:

http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitter-a-clarification-of-my-article.html


I think that you need a transparent brain to hear these differences. They don't exist, and you hear them because you want to hear them. I'm sure that manufacturers of audiophile burners will tell a different story, as will some people who purchased a very expensive audiophile burner. At this point in the discussion I usually plug the excellent book "Mistakes Were Made - But Not By Me" (look it up at Amazon if you're interested) which explains how people can back themselves into a corner and then rather invent their own reality than admitting that their initial assumptions or decisions were wrong.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 13:21
Originally posted by ProgBob ProgBob wrote:



As for comparing a burned copy of a CD with the original, then if they sound different on the same CD player it can only because the original rip was not successful (using EAC, or DBPoweramp with AccurateRip can eliminate this possibility), or one or the other of the CD's is not playing properly on the CD player.  If this really is an issue - and I must admit I am dubious - then again it points to using a computer as a more reliable source of the digitised music.

For the accurate (ie audiophile) comparison that Oliver was discussing we would have to assume that the burnt data was from the same source and the playback system was also the same so that the only variable was the CDR burning equipment itself and the rip was not a contributing factor:
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

No i was not even talking about MP3. I've got a very transparent
system and i've compared original CDs Vs computer copy Vs (Pionner) audiophile burner.
Now, he goes on to say that the audiophile burner isn't as good as the original CD:
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

The result is the following: the original sounds the best, the audiophile copy doesn't sounds agressive but lacks life & dynamic. The computer copy sounds harsh and lacks life & dynamic.
Which not only suggests that the rip affects the dynamics of the audio data (which it can't), but the burning process also affects the audio data (which, again, it can't). A badly ripped data stream has glitches and drop-out - that is a different kettle of poissons to "harsh", "aggressive" and "lacks life & dynamic" ripping cannot affect the overal audio quality or sound - that's a mathematical impossibility - those are (analogue) audio qualities that are independant of anything (and everything) in the digital domain.
 
What?
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2011 at 19:38
The copies I burn (from either source discs or downloads) are comparable to the original, but; the gain - or recording volume - is noticeably diminished.  This is compensated during playback by higher gain or EQ, but it could be perceived as a 'drop in quality' or even 'harshness' I suppose.

Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 00:51
^ That's also not possible, unless the software you use for burning does more to the content than mere digital copying.

Edited by Mr ProgFreak - April 06 2011 at 00:51
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 01:18
it may

Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 01:43
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:


Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:



EDIT: that's why i explained that us audiophiles separate our CD source from the rest of our devices in order to avoid the specific kind of CD deck's power supplies to reject electric pollution to the others elements of the system. Imagine your CD ROM deck within your computer. It shares its power supply with all the other elements of the computer. So it's extremely polluted. That's the reason of being of home burners.
But of course these differences can be heard only on a transparent system.
Source:

http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitter-a-clarification-of-my-article.html

I think that you need a transparent brain to hear these differences. They don't exist, and you hear them because you want to hear them. I'm sure that manufacturers of audiophile burners will tell a different story, as will some people who purchased a very expensive audiophile burner. At this point in the discussion I usually plug the excellent book "Mistakes Were Made - But Not By Me" (look it up at Amazon if you're interested) which explains how people can back themselves into a corner and then rather invent their own reality than admitting that their initial assumptions or decisions were wrong.


This applies perfectly to you as you seem to believe that the specs of a given device will tell you if it sounds good or not or that something is good because it's new.
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 01:44
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

The copies I burn (from either source discs or downloads) are comparable to the original, but; the gain - or recording volume - is noticeably diminished.  This is compensated during playback by higher gain or EQ, but it could be perceived as a 'drop in quality' or even 'harshness' I suppose.


Indeed, if you have to playback louder to get the same volume than the original, it may bring more distorsion.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 01:53
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

The copies I burn (from either source discs or downloads) are comparable to the original, but; the gain - or recording volume - is noticeably diminished.  This is compensated during playback by higher gain or EQ, but it could be perceived as a 'drop in quality' or even 'harshness' I suppose.


Indeed, if you have to playback louder to get the same volume than the original, it may bring more distorsion.
How?
What?
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65266
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 02:32
it doesn't bring distortion, and I've got a killer set of JBLs so it's not a problem

Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 08:15
I dont know the reason but i swear what i said is true. Anyway, all people owning a normal pair of ears agree with me when doing the comparisons on my system.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 08:17
^ people owning a pair of ears are statistically above average Wink
What?
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 09:12
You should remove your fingers from yours!

Seriously Dean, when do you come at home so i can prove you my points by a listening session?

Edited by oliverstoned - April 06 2011 at 09:13
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 09:39
^ a kind offer Oliver, but one I doubt I will be able to take you up on... but you never know, stranger things have happend.
What?
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2011 at 13:06
I have an impression of deja vu, as if we already had this discussions...

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 57>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.