If George Carlin was still with us I'm sure he would have lots of funny things to say about our little hobby.
Very fun/likeable man.
Crystal Disc US$1600 was played with Genesis Speaker
- Thread starter andymodern
- Start date
Very fun/likeable man.
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Andy was telling me that Sony is going to release this on Crystal Disc - if so, then we can compare to LP. I'm sure MikeL or jazdoc will have a first pressing, and may be the tape even? Will someone here buy it?
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
If George Carlin was still with us I'm sure he would have lots of funny things to say about our little hobby.
| George Carlin meets the Audiophile If an particular amplifier sounds better than the rest, why don't they just clone the dang thing ? Ever notice that anyone playing louder music than you is an idiot, but anyone playing lower than you is an audiophile? Why do people burn in their amplifiers to improve the sound? How do electrons know that you want better sound and not worse? Does a tone deaf audiophile say the amplifier sounds bright after regaining his hearing ? Or was the amplifier an innocent victim ? How come nobody says "It sounds bad" after doing a major equipment upgrade ? How does an amplifier know if the music is a complex music passage and it needs to take extra care to please you? Last night I played a blank CD at full blast. The audiophile next door went nuts. If 4 out of 5 audiophiles suffers from psychoacoustics .... does that mean that one enjoys it? |
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
I think he mentioned that the Japanese charge 200,000 yen (about $2,000) whereas he only charges HKD 12800 (about $1,600).
There seem to be two different discussions ongoing on this thread. The first would be the questioning of the technological validity and the effectiveness of this medium The second seems to be the discussion of the pricing of this particular item.
Are the two connected? Would we be so very skeptical of the former if the latter was priced at a point that would seem reasonable to all; I think not.
In this instance, the value or lack thereof, seems to be the underlying concern to the majority. Since, the manufacturer of this particular disc would seem to be stating that the value is accepted by enough of an audience as to make the product viable,then I would suggest that the rest of us accept the fact that this pricing is marketable.( At least to an audience that seems to have no problem with the pricing....The real question might be as to what price would said audience begin to object, BUT that is for another thread).
As Gary stated earlier, is this disc really that much different than the $25K transport or the $50K pair of cables. It would seem not, on the face of it that is. However, I have to wonder what price could be obtained for a CD like this...why only $1600- and why not $16K or $160K or $1.6M, etc. The answer must lie in the fact that the manufacturer and their dealer know what is possible and more importantly what isn't. OTOH, perhaps these new Crystal Disc's are an entry level product and the next itineration will be priced at $160K...
Are the two connected? Would we be so very skeptical of the former if the latter was priced at a point that would seem reasonable to all; I think not.
In this instance, the value or lack thereof, seems to be the underlying concern to the majority. Since, the manufacturer of this particular disc would seem to be stating that the value is accepted by enough of an audience as to make the product viable,then I would suggest that the rest of us accept the fact that this pricing is marketable.( At least to an audience that seems to have no problem with the pricing....The real question might be as to what price would said audience begin to object, BUT that is for another thread).
As Gary stated earlier, is this disc really that much different than the $25K transport or the $50K pair of cables. It would seem not, on the face of it that is. However, I have to wonder what price could be obtained for a CD like this...why only $1600- and why not $16K or $160K or $1.6M, etc. The answer must lie in the fact that the manufacturer and their dealer know what is possible and more importantly what isn't. OTOH, perhaps these new Crystal Disc's are an entry level product and the next itineration will be priced at $160K...
Yes, they are somewhat directly interconnected Davey. ...In the high-end things of the ladder.
But remember too; this is Japanese technology, and with it comes complex manufacturing process, at this stage and time.
{The first LG OLED Ultra HDTV 55" was $15,000, now Samsung has one, also a 55" one, for $9,000}
But remember too; this is Japanese technology, and with it comes complex manufacturing process, at this stage and time.
{The first LG OLED Ultra HDTV 55" was $15,000, now Samsung has one, also a 55" one, for $9,000}
garylkoh
WBF Technical Expert (Speakers & Audio Equipment)
Actually, it's nothing new. Robert Harley reviewed one in 2009:
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/the-2000-cd-made-from-glass-1/
and I first heard one by Winston probably around the same time. Glass masters have been in use since the first CDs were stamped , but these were extremely delicate. It was the development of shatterproof Gorilla Glass by Corning that made these possible as something that can actually be sold to consumers. AFAIK, a glass master costs from $600 to $1,200 to make, depending on the plant.
Just like if you ever had the chance to compare a lacquer and the eventual pressed LP, the difference between the glass master and the actual pressed CD is night and day. The difference is that a lacquer would deteriorate at every play. The glass master won't.
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/the-2000-cd-made-from-glass-1/
and I first heard one by Winston probably around the same time. Glass masters have been in use since the first CDs were stamped , but these were extremely delicate. It was the development of shatterproof Gorilla Glass by Corning that made these possible as something that can actually be sold to consumers. AFAIK, a glass master costs from $600 to $1,200 to make, depending on the plant.
Just like if you ever had the chance to compare a lacquer and the eventual pressed LP, the difference between the glass master and the actual pressed CD is night and day. The difference is that a lacquer would deteriorate at every play. The glass master won't.
An amusing article.
It leaves the reader to conclude that "jitter" in the reading of the raw 1s and 0s is the same as jitter at the output of the DAC, but is forced to admit this, merely as an aside:
It's called 'humouring a crank'. I love the way that the only solid information he got from this encounter was "CDs were incapable of analog-like variability in sound quality" but this is twisted into evidence of a cover-up by Philips. And as inventors of the medium, this must prove that CD is badly flawed.
Rather than just making a connection between price and quality, or suggesting laborious listening tests (just have a beer instead and listen to some music
), why don't people here take some time to study how a CD player works? Can they find a flaw in the system that a glass disc (with literally better quality 1s and 0s) could solve? If all you can find is something to do with extra work for the digital circuitry to do so it must be something to do with ground noise and the power supply etc. suggest how this could affect the sound without being measurable. And then, think of unconventional ways to measure it so you can convince everyone else, or think of ways to fix the problem. Listening 'tests' won't solve anything.
This bears repeating. Gentlemen, when you run your tests at Mike's room, get an innocent bystander to change the discs behind your backs or behind a curtain. Do not allow him to speak other than to say "A." "B." Make sure he is out of sight of the participants. If you can't find exactly the same source material on conventional CD, rip it and burn it. Compare them many times. Let the man behind the curtain keep score.
I wouldn't spend much time on the vinyl until you're done with the serious testing, personally. That difference should be pretty obvious.
Tim
Last edited:
Probably from their K2HD CD mastering. I have the Japanese CD and it sounds much better than the regular versions.
Can we consider a 'CD player' that, instead of being fitted inside one box, is split into two pieces: a transport, and a DAC section. The DAC has a buffer, a high accuracy clock and independent power supply, and its job is to clock out the samples in the buffer from its analogue output at an extremely regular rate. When the buffer is nearing empty, a request is sent to the transport for some more data. The transport obliges, reading a few more values from the CD and sending them via a transformer or optocoupler to the DAC's buffer. Now, as long as the numbers are accurate and get to the buffer in time, there should be no artefacts at all related to the absolute quality of the 1s and 0s on the CD. Right..? The transport and DAC could be on opposite sides of the world, linked by the internet, and the system would work in just the same way.
In this case the power supplies are independent, so how could the quality of the 1s and 0s affect the sound? The only thing I can think of is that the DAC section is so fragile and feeble that its output is modulated by the arrival of the data into the buffer - maybe some breakthrough of noise via the power supply or ground lines. So maybe, just maybe, the regularity of the arrival of the bits affects the nature (but not the existence or level) of that noise..? In this extremely unlikely event, an intermediate isolated buffer could be employed to ensure perfectly regular delivery of data to the DAC's buffer. I'll design you one for $1600.
But this is very basic stuff and we're not even talking about fast logic and cutting edge data rates, so that's what I mean about it being almost an "insult" to the designers of digital audio equipment. They had already thought of the 'analogue' side of the CD long before Mr Crystal Disc, and had built an elegant mechanism to remove it from the equation. From the outset, CD players effectively employed the 'asynchronous mode' that is now used in the best audio DACs. If you can spot a flaw in the existing system, suggest a way to fix it without relying on voodoo and a $1600 gold plated glass disc!
In this case the power supplies are independent, so how could the quality of the 1s and 0s affect the sound? The only thing I can think of is that the DAC section is so fragile and feeble that its output is modulated by the arrival of the data into the buffer - maybe some breakthrough of noise via the power supply or ground lines. So maybe, just maybe, the regularity of the arrival of the bits affects the nature (but not the existence or level) of that noise..? In this extremely unlikely event, an intermediate isolated buffer could be employed to ensure perfectly regular delivery of data to the DAC's buffer. I'll design you one for $1600.
But this is very basic stuff and we're not even talking about fast logic and cutting edge data rates, so that's what I mean about it being almost an "insult" to the designers of digital audio equipment. They had already thought of the 'analogue' side of the CD long before Mr Crystal Disc, and had built an elegant mechanism to remove it from the equation. From the outset, CD players effectively employed the 'asynchronous mode' that is now used in the best audio DACs. If you can spot a flaw in the existing system, suggest a way to fix it without relying on voodoo and a $1600 gold plated glass disc!
Rather than just making a connection between price and quality, or suggesting laborious listening tests (just have a beer instead and listen to some music
Engineers, experts and audio designers did it. They come with many solutions to the problem, most of them having different sound signatures. Probably most of them used them to create a sound that could attract their (and customers, surely) preferences.
It is part of our hobby to carry listening tests, people do it mainly for enjoyment and audiophile curiosity - I really wished I could participate in Mike session or carry it in my system, perhaps the price of the flight would be more expensive than buying the Crystal CD
but I would miss the companionship of all these WBF friends!Not the case. The link between CD transport and DAC is synchronous for the vast majority of DACs, and always has been. The clock in the transport provides the master clock to the dac. Your description of the digital signal path is at best an oversimplification of one out of many possible architectures. There are big differences in signal path (i.e. what gets buffered, transformed, clocked where) between transport linked to DAC via I2S, S/PDIF and in integrated CD players for that matter. However, for out crystal disc this is all besides the point. The only way the disc can sound different/better is if changes in the optical domain (we is strictly what we are dealing with here). Even if the pits engraved in the media have more dimensional accuracy and physical reflective properties, it would be my understanding that as long is these differences are with the margin within which laser sees the encoding information as a 1 or a 0, it results on the exact same electrical pulse downstream, representing either a 0 or 1 in the electrical domain. These pulses are at some point translated in a different states in silicon, representing the buffered data. Since these are strictly on/off states, there can be no differences as long as the data stream is identical. Harley's article asserted that while datastream is identical, the sound is different. This defies the basics of digital signal processing. If it sounds different the datastream has to be different.
I don't personally have the RTR master dub of that performance, maybe Bruce does?. however; I have the Classic Records 45rpm box set which is outstanding. it's among the very best sounding 45's I have.....and I have the Hybrid SACD (I cannot remember how good it sounds it's been so long since I listened to it).....I may have the dsd file too but cannot remember whether I do or not. i'll look thru my server to see.
I do also have the Classic 33rpm vinyl of this.
Jazdoc likely does have an original pressing. in this case i'm betting the Classic 45 rules.
Last edited:
first; Tim.....you should come to Seattle for this.....I will even contribute to your plane fare fund personally.
second, my only reaction to your request for blind testing is
.I don't want this thread to decend into that discussion.
I do promise to do blind testing for sure if you show up.
I beg to differ. The principle is exactly as I have described, though you can debate how it is split between DAC and transport. From the very earliest CD chipsets, there is a central clock which provides the DAC's sample rate. This is fixed and precise. The motor is slaved to the clock so as to maintain the required data rate from the disc on average, but of course the flow of data varies in a coarse fashion. The data is fed into a FIFO, so the timing of its arrival doesn't matter as long as the FIFO doesn't empty or overfill. The FIFO's fill level is what controls the motor. Portable CD players could maintain a higher disc speed to allow for re-reads following breaks in the data flow due to shocks - the resulting system is perfectly analogous to today's asynchronous DACs. I said "the DAC requests more data" but it could just as well have been "the FIFO fill level is fed back to the transport". It's exactly the same result.
To call this system purely synchronous is misleading IMO, suggesting that the reading of data from the CD has a link to the jitter at the output. As you later say, it doesn't, but as I mentioned, someone determined to find a use for a $1600 CD could home in on 'ground related issues', hence my description of completely separate transport and DAC, plus extra buffer.
I don't want this thread to decend into that discussion.
I do promise to do blind testing for sure if you show up.
Or Pink Fish Media based on a couple of the posts.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Sticky
