Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?

[hopkins]

Perhaps a more powerful testament to the profound power of the system-Remastering process on that threat is WBF member Will submitting a request to replay a badly produced track through my WAAR system with the system-Remastering process:

Posts #52 - #58 in the “There is a smarter way” thread.

Post 52: I know this track, the bass here is bloated and the whole tonal balance is skewed
Post 56: don't know this track, you did not put the "non-remastered" version, but I don't feel the need to hear more

Am I being too critical? Maybe my expectations were too high after reading your bold claims :<

 

[Carlos269]

Post 52: I know this track, the bass here is bloated and the whole tonal balance is skewed
Post 56: don't know this track, you did not put the "non-remastered" version, but I don't feel the need to hear more

Am I being too critical? Maybe my expectations were too high after reading your bold claims :<

I think that the takeaway and the part to focus on is the power of the remastering process as our taste are different and the end result may not be exactly to your liking, but given the remastering tools, and similar knowledge on adjustments, you can tailor the resultant sound to match your ideal sound, that it’s in your head. That is the power that system-Remastering offers. The WAAR system is currently fine tuned to “my” liking.

With my WAAR system with the system-Remastering process, I now own a system that is adjustable to meet any requests. If you were in the room with me I would make the adjustment you wanted to hear until you were 100% satisfied. What other system in the world can make that claim.

 

[PeterA]

I think that the takeaway and the part to focus on is the power of the remastering process as our taste are different and the end result may not be exactly to your liking, but given the remastering tools, and similar knowledge on adjustments, you can tailor the resultant sound to match your ideal sound, that it’s in your head. That is the power that system-Remastering offers. The WAAR system is currently fine tuned to “my” liking.

With my WAAR system with the system-Remastering process, I now own a system that is adjustable to meet any requests. If you were in the room with me I would make the adjustment you wanted to hear until you were 100% satisfied. What other system in the world can make that claim.

There are two questions in the thread title. It sounds like you’re making the claim that you WAAR system can tailor the sound of any system to any result. If one wants his digital system to sound what he thinks is the sound of a good vinyl system, you can make that happen for him.

What is the answer to the second question: at what price? How much does your WAAR system cost and what is involved in the training so that one can actually use it optimally?

 

[treitz3]

If the sound of a CD is compressed, what can you do with it?

Use it as a Frisbee and aim for the trash can.

Tom

 

[hopkins]

I think that the takeaway and the part to focus on is the power of the remastering process as our taste are different and the end result may not be exactly to your liking, but given the remastering tools, and similar knowledge on adjustments, you can tailor the resultant sound to match your ideal sound, that it’s in your head. That is the power that system-Remastering offers. The WAAR system is currently fine tuned to “my” liking.

With my WAAR system with the system-Remastering process, I now own a system that is adjustable to meet any requests. If you were in the room with me I would make the adjustment you wanted to hear until you were 100% satisfied. What other system in the world can make that claim.

I don't buy that, but if you are happy with it, that's what counts. Have you demoed the system to others?

 

[AudioGod]

I think that the takeaway and the part to focus on is the power of the remastering process as our taste are different and the end result may not be exactly to your liking, but given the remastering tools, and similar knowledge on adjustments, you can tailor the resultant sound to match your ideal sound, that it’s in your head. That is the power that system-Remastering offers. The WAAR system is currently fine tuned to “my” liking.

With my WAAR system with the system-Remastering process, I now own a system that is adjustable to meet any requests. If you were in the room with me I would make the adjustment you wanted to hear until you were 100% satisfied. What other system in the world can make that claim.

What's a WAAR system ?

 

[Carlos269]

There are two questions in the thread title. It sounds like you’re making the claim that you WAAR system can tailor the sound of any system to any result.

Yes, that is the claim that I’m making.

If one wants his digital system to sound what he thinks is the sound of a good vinyl system, you can make that happen for him.

Yes, the degree of success in achieving the end result is only limited by the equipment and end user’s abilities to make the necessary adjustments to achieve the objective. It is a creative tool with a great degree of recall built in so it is fun to A/B like at the optometrist, which one is better 1 or 2 until you converge on a solution that focuses in on your preferences

What is the answer to the second question: at what price?

I offer the remastering system in three levels: A modest entry level system at $40k plus expenses. A premium level system at $70k and an Ultra level system at $90K, all three plus the expenses associated with deployment, travel, lodging and meals. The cost deltas are mostly due to the level, features and capabilities of the physical equipment.

How much does your WAAR system cost

I estimate that the retail cost of my WAAR system with the remastering process to be around $470K. It has a “premium” level remastering package installed.

and what is involved in the training so that one can actually use it optimally?

Depending on the end-user’s starting Knowledge and understanding of the concept, the tools, the objectives, and systematic way to adjust and dial in the system the training required and training period will vary, but in the interest of a successful execution I would undertake all system installation training personal to exceed the expectations.

It is obviously in my interest to have successful product installations as the mentality in these circles is that if you make believers out of one or two prominent individuals then the others will follow.

For anyone seriously considering such a system, it all starts with a phone conversation, a consultation and an in person demonstration of the WAAR system with the Remastering process.

 

[Carlos269]

I don't buy that, but if you are happy with it, that's what counts. Have you demoed the system to others?

What exactly is the issue that you find so hard to believe? I have played my systems for others and what I’m doing with it is beyond most of their comprehension so the level of engagement has not been there on a technical basis other than superlatives on the sonic basis.

 

[Carlos269]

What's a WAAR system ?

WAAR = Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush speaker system.

 

[Lagonda]

Use it as a Frisbee and aim for the trash can.

Tom

There are alternative uses !

 

[Rexp]

There are alternative uses ! View attachment 121150

Bet the knife sounds better.

 

[hopkins]

What exactly is the issue that you find so hard to believe? I have played my systems for others and what I’m doing with it is beyond most of their comprehension so the level of engagement has not been there on a technical basis other than superlatives on the sonic basis.

I honestly don't understand what you are doing, and I am not sure I understand why you are doing it either. But let's move on.

 

[Carlos269]

I honestly don't understand what you are doing,

Fair enough, sometimes the concept is hard to wrap your head around but in essence I’m using tools to adjust the frequency, amplitude, and temporal response of my system with a prescribed and predictable method.

and I am not sure I understand why you are doing it either.

My motivation for doing this is the same motivation others have in upgrading equipment, to try to achieve a sound that is more convincing and pleasing from my system. I have designed and devised a process that is, in my view, a “smarter” way of achieving results than the status quo, the trial and error component substitutions.

 

[Lagonda]

Bet the knife sounds better.

Even Carlos can not save that one !

 

[tima]

As it is not my personal objective, I am not well-qualified to answer your question. Perhaps Chuck can answer.

it is on my list of possible high-end audio objectives because I believe it to be the conceptual objective of many audiophiles.

Because this construction embeds pejoratively your view of the matter. Because that is not the way the audiophiles who have this objective as their goal think of the situation.

I thought you said it was not your objective and because of that Peter needed to get answers from some one who had the objective. But now you have insight to how those with the objective think about it. What changed your mind; did you adopt the objective?

Perhaps another epicycle will help things fall into place. Those worked for Ptolomey ... at least for a while.

 

[tima]

How do we know that Ron? Who has this goal, and have they explained how they can know that they are hearing what you write as the "exact same" as the original recording?

If some have the goal of hearing "exactly" what is on the original or master tape or file", then whether a system is transparent (does not homogenize) is extremely relevant to those with that goal. How could it not be?

I think it is worthwhile to understanding this topic that hearing a reproduction that sounds exactly like hearing the master is not the same as hearing exactly what is on the master. The former is possible, the latter is not.

Your points remain the same.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

How is one able to judge success in this specific audio objective? I understand about theoretical objectives and your attempts to categorize, but this one would seem more objective than subjective, and I do not understand how we could ever know how close we are so it seems like an elusive quest.

How about "trying to achieve what we think or hope or guess is exactly the same as what is on the master tape or digital file"?

there is a difference between feeling you are personally achieving your music reproduction reference hitting goals, and rationalizing proof in some form or fashion. or convincing others. over time i think it's possible to get to that comfortably. need quite a bit of water under the bridge, and a degree of peace of mind.

this is doable.

it's really about developing your own reference for performance. it's something in your head that is an end place that you measure stuff by. but don't expect any amen's. the best you can do is shared listening and finding common ground. over time then others can understand where you are coming from. takes some work to do that.

 

[ssfas]

It would be interesting to get all the living great mastering engineers on a panel and you will find that there is no convergence of opinions. What I have found is that most mastering engineers are tradesmen that don’t understand nor are they interested in the science, engineering, and technology behind the scene of their equipment and have just learned how to use it to achieve their desired results. There are/were some that clearly know their stuff and can articulate, discuss, and teach courses on the subject matter. Bob Katz is a subject matter expert and there are others. Bob Ludwig is retired now but he always was on the cutting edge.

Bob Ludwig worked with dCS developing upsampling converters and software to create the first SACD almost 25 years ago. Before that, I suppose a lot of recording engineers worked it out for themselves as they went along, in parallel with the research departments, such as operated by the BBC, Decca and EMI in the London area going back over 100 years.

These days it seems to be rather different. Here in the UK we have a few universities with specialist music and media departments with full professional facilities, and with strong industry connections, so that graduates hit the ground running with some experience and a lot of technical skills and knowledge.

Music and Media | University of Surrey

We offer courses in music, creative music technology, sound recording, digital media arts and film and video production technology.

www.surrey.ac.uk

Digital media

Study an undergraduate degree at Ravensbourne University London. Learn more about our degree courses in digital media.

www.ravensbourne.ac.uk

They don't spend the first year making tea, like in the old days. My oldest friend's daughter studied photography at Ravensbourne, I think she had an agent before she graduated and now she's leading campaigns around the world for major fashion and shows brands - at age 26.

There's a very good mastering studio down the road from here, founded by George Martin in the 1960s, who have a close association with Surrey University (see above).

Scholarship - AIR Studios

ABOUT The AIR Diversity Scholarship for Tonmeisters was born out of a future vision of the sound and recording world shared by AIR and the University of Surrey, in recognition of the importance of providing opportunities within the industry for underrepresented ethnic groups. It builds on the...

www.airstudios.com

Their mastering team are mix of old hands and young guns, and the young guns seem to win the awards.

Mastering - AIR Studios

The new Alchemy Mastering at AIR specialises in all formats of analogue and digital mastering, providing high-end audio services to the global music industry. From independent artists to major labels and cult TV soundtracks to Hollywood blockbusters, our team has the craft and vision to enhance...

www.airstudios.com

There are lots of places like Air, although Air has an amazing project portfolio in film and TV soundtracks as much as music, but they can do direct cut and vinyl mastering along with several other leading studios.

But just as an example, the mastering engineers at Air are highly knowledgeable in the science, engineering and tech, and many are in their 20s and 30s. There is a very strong relationship between commercial organisations, academia and research/project development. You look at the Surrey staff and they cover a vast range of commercial experience and research into everything from Spatial Audio to AI.

My impression is that the audio industry has moved on from the "grey hairs" with their magical skills. In the classical world, for example, engineers and musicians must be able to record 60 to 90 minutes in 2 to 3 days. That's been the case for decades, and standards have generally been consistently high.

Ironically, it's some of the audiophile labels that have all the tech, but do not have the knowledge or experience in studio work, whose recordings sometimes aren't so good. They sometimes seem to want to show of their tech rather than make a convincing recording.

 

[jeromelang]

Yeah.... he and his son also said everytime you copy/paste or transfer a digital file, it changes the sound!

So, I wasn't imaging things

Everytime someone copy/paste a digital file, it does change the sound!

"jit pai seow liow" => this time I must be going crazy


Maybe i wasn't so crazy after all.


.

 

[Amir]

Excuse me for off-topic, This is my personal opinion about Objective measurements vs Subjective Listening .

I am Electronics Engineer from KNTU university (Tehran, Iran) so I am not against scientific approach.

The Objective vs Subjective debate is an old debate , some notes come to my mind :
In Electronics The true objective modeling of Audio Equipments is not easy, It is so much complex because of non-linearity.
you know in electronics all thing simplified to linear model but in real world all electronic parts (even a resistor) are non-linear.
modeling non-linear parts is very complex and measurements are related to simplified mathematical modeling.
I believe if we hear different sound (for example two digital cable or ...) then we can measure the difference but measuring by simplified model do not give us enough information.
non-linear systems have so much more parameters to measure and it is not easy.

if the subject was simple and we had a mathematical modeling of both equipments and human hearing system then we had answers of many questions but in real world it is very complex.

we can not measure all parameters of non linear systems as a black box in real world. If you simplify then yes you can measure but simplified approach will not answer our questions.
I guess the only way to have agreement between subjectivist and objectivist is advancing measurement methods.

Music is very Complex signal and our perception is also very complex and the audio systems are nonlinear and complex systems.
What we hear is a very complex process and if you want to look at this subject from your Measurement devices you should advance your methods.

If you passed signal systems books in university then you know measuring non linear systems is not easy.

about non linear system identification as black box :

https://cyberdoc.univ-lemans.fr/theses/2009/2009LEMA1009.pdf

Audio systems and music signal are both complex.

if simple measurements can not answer our questions then we should go for more accurate more complex measurements to get our answers.

- I believe in measurements.
- Audio equipments are Nonlinear systems
- Music signal is not simple tone
- Human hearing is not simple linear system


I had many many blind tests in past and the result was obvious for myself that not all but many things are not snake oil and Ican hear how those things change the sound. I also had many tests between A and B that i could not easily detect the difference (blind test) and i never upgraded A to B. If you are trained listener and if you have high performance transparent audio system and good room acoustics and good ac quality and you can professionally find best location for speakers (maximum dynamics) then you can hear differences in blind test.
As i am engineer i believe in measurements but not in your simplified model.


Some notes :


Part 1: Audio measurements and mathematics model of audio systems

if you read Electromagnetic books like cheng (https://www.amazon.com/Field-Wave-Electromagnetics-David-Cheng/dp/0201128195) then you can answer me and have a conversation about this subject, if not then you should read this book first.
this book is about 4 maxwell equations of E and B (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations) . this is macro model of electronics science. when you want calculate the parameters of this equations then you need to simplify the parameters up to your accuracy range.
for example in simplified model of circuits we do not model 1m cable and we imagine the 1m cable is like short circuit.
when you need more precise model you should calculate the impedance of 1m cable.
in simplified model all C are constant and all L are constant and all R are constant and we model all of it as a linear simple system.
all capacitor dielectrics are non-linear , all resistors are non-linear all coeficient of equations are non-linear and for precise mode you should go for very very complex equations that only super computers could give you numeric analysys of equations.
if you want to have precise model you can not choose simple electronics model of V and I .
if you use maxwell equations for non-linear audio system then all cables will be different and all capacitors are not equal.
in real world that so many parameters like non-static impedances , vibration , ac quality , noise and ... will change the system response then the final equation will be even more complex. it is not hard to undrestand that maxwell equations will tell you all cables all capacitors and even two simple resistors and ... are not equal . all transports are not equal (bits are ok but waveform of digital signal is different), all dacs are not equal and ...
an engineer knows for measurements of non-linear system as "black box" you can not measure all parameters of non-linear systems easily. check these links and Volterra series.

Nonlinear system identification - Wikipedia​

en.m.wikipedia.org
https://cyberdoc.univ-lemans.fr/theses/2009/2009LEMA1009.pdf
all of measurements published in ASR forum are based on simplified models of audio system and if you see no differnce between cables then you should advance your measurements. simplified measurements and rating audio components by SINAD is useless and it is like judging humans only by their weight.
for example in measuring Jitter if you show the jitter as a number then it is not the whole story and it is more complex than a simple number. some designers like Ed meitner designed special tools for jitter measurement (Logic Induced Modulation Detector).
when you play music and listen to A vs B the sound signal pass through many non-linear stages and it is better to measure the final output of loudspeakers.

conclusion: measurements can show you differences




Part 2: Human Hearing

Human hearing is very complex and both the brain and ears are very very complex .
we have little information about it and we can not model human hearing by mathematics .
when you have not precise model of human hearing then you can not say human hearing can not undrestand minor changes in sound. it is better to let a professional listener tell you what he/she hear in blind tests (right and confort condition).

conclusion: we can not say human hearing can not detect minor changes in sound



Part 3: Subjective Audio Reviewing

if you look at audio reviews you realise all audio reviewers have similar idea about sound of a product. for example nordost vallhala was a little bright and most reviewers pointed the valhalla is bright. all believe silver cables are brighter than copper cables.
if the subjective audio was hallucination or fault of human perception then we had not common/equal opinions.
if subjective audio reveiw was halo effect then 50% of audio reviewers report silver is brighter and 50% report copper is brighter and we had not common/equal opinions.

conclusion: Subjective Audio Review is Valid/reliable and worth.



Part 4: Professional Audiophiles

Brain has very complex sound signal processing and a professional listener or orchestral conductor could train himself to have better sound processing. orchestral conductor can detect even a small faulty tone in a large orchestral . a trained audiophile can detect minor changes in sound when he listen for hours to a transparent system.
I think our brain is very complex and you can improve/train your brain to analyse more information. a beginner instrument player brain is not like a professional player and the brain capacity in signal processing improve across the time.

Conclusion: trained listeners have better ability to detect minor changes




Part 5: Audio Designers

it is not funny you discard all efforts of great designers like Kondo , Kevin (Living Voice) , Eduardo de Lima (Audiopax), Sakuma, Lamm, Nelson Pass , Tim Paravicini , Ed Meitner and ... all we have in audio (good sound reproduction) depends on efforts of great designers.
if we believe all audio is snake oil then we should discard all of those efforts.
non of these designers developed their products only by measuring THD . I think we should regard these efforts.
we have similar world in instrument makers, you can not discard Stradivari violins because the simple audio measurements can not describe the difference. if we had a copy of Mr. Majidimehr in music world then we will replaced Stradivari volin by a cheap chinese violin made by iron.
Audio is a complex Subject and desiging good sounding audio equipments is about both art and science.

Conclusion: Great Audio Designers improved sound quality not by simple model of electronics but with listening to Music



I think to me the best way is listening to audio equipments in blind tests and i have my personal blind test method .
In my blind test (between A and B) i close my eyes and ask my friend to play different music albums when A is in the system . I repeat again and again and my brain try to learn about the sound of A.
Then I ask my friend to put B in the system and play the music and my brain try to learn the sound of B. This test maybe takes more than 30 minutes and in the next step i ask my friend to choose A or B and with blind eyes i try to detect It is A or B.
If my answer be wrong then i do not continue test and i convince that i can not detect the difference but if i detect correctly for more than 5 times then i can say the test is valid and i can hear the difference between A and B.
Brain needs the time to learn in my blind test.