The real problem is that since it is cleary proved now that no one can reliability detect such "digital steps" by listening in a reliable way
No such thing has been proved at all, let alone “clearly proved.”
The real problem is that since it is cleary proved now that no one can reliability detect such "digital steps" by listening in a reliable way
I took my MoFi Miles Davis Kind of Blue (DSD 64 transfer) and borrowed my friend's Analogue Productions Clarity Miles Davis Kind of Blue (Analogue) playing them back to back, and side by side. (multiple systems, multiple turntables) and yes after listening intently and really focusing there are differences, albeit subtle ones between the recordings, but I'll be damned if I can unequivocally point to them and single them out as being the by-product of a digital step.
Now that we Elmer Fudds know there really is a rabbit there in that Mo-Fi vinyl …
(...) The real problem is that since it is cleary proved now that no one can reliability detect such "digital steps" by listening in a reliable way we are still just speculating and slowly learning. But anyone following professional forums and activities knows that the best professionals in current industry considers the higher bit rates sonically transparent. (...)
No such thing has been proved at all, let alone “clearly proved.”
Thank you for reporting this interesting comparison.
Now that we Elmer Fudds know there really is a rabbit there in that Mo-Fi vinyl was there any sonic attribute or trace which you think or even suspect could be attributable to the digital step? Any sense of or trace of “dryness” or “brittleness” or less “liquidity” or less ambiance with the Mo-Fi record?
If you could keep only one of those two re-issues, which one would you keep?
I have been transferring my analogue master tapes to high def. PCM and DSD. The two sounds quite distinct, at least on my DAC, and one can easily tell them apart. DSD sounds closer to the analogue tape.The recent "outing" of a digital step proves quite convenient for MF to claim/claimed to hear something different 90% of the time. Who knows what a digital step actually sounds like, and can MF even unequivocally demonstrate that that's what he actually hearing? It could be something diametrically opposite. It's just that now there's something for MF and others to point to and exclaim 'yeah, I knew I heard something and THAT must be it.'
To paraphrase Supreme Court Justice Stewart [Jacobellis v. Ohio 1964]
re: pornography — "I'll know it when I see it"
re: digital steps — "I'll know it when I hear it, and there's a convenient name for it, even if it's not what I'm actually hearing.'
I took my MoFi Miles Davis Kind of Blue (DSD 64 transfer) and borrowed my friend's Analogue Productions Clarity Miles Davis Kind of Blue (Analogue) playing them back to back, and side by side. (multiple systems, multiple turntables) and yes after listening intently and really focusing there are differences, albeit subtle ones between the recordings, but I'll be damned if I can unequivocally point to them and single them out as being the by-product of a digital step.
In my attempts to internally communicate the differences I found myself hearkening back to lengthy discussions I had with Cookie Marenco about audible comparisons between DSD and PCM files.
My concern now is that this is going to rekindle the vernacular of the DSD vs PCM debate, where the latter's qualities and characteristics will be projected upon analogue (read this to mean reissues WITHOUT digital steps).
Have some fun:
1, track down articles where DSD and PCM are being debated and/or discussed
2, grab a couple of the articles and import them into your favourite word processor
3, find and replace all instances of the term PCM with analogue
4, re-read the articles
5, take note of the adjectives and descriptive phrases
Don't be too surprised if you start hearing/reading them crop up in the near future when fellow audiophiles are talking and/or writing about the sound of albums absent of digital steps in terms originally reserved for PCM when contrasted with DSD.
I have been transferring my analogue master tapes to high def. PCM and DSD. The two sounds quite distinct, at least on my DAC, and one can easily tell them apart. DSD sounds closer to the analogue tape.
I am using a Tascam DA-3000 to encode, and a Lampizator Level 5 for DAC. The tape machine is a Nagra T Audio using my own tube tape head preamp.What is your ADC/DAC system?
IMHO after more than ten years and none of the golden ears, even the digitalphobes, detecting it , I assumed it as proved until further news.
Not really! A friend recently sent an email to me regarding Fremer receiving an email stating that there was digital in MoFi one steps. This email was written in 2019. I deleted it but I’ll see if it’s still in my trash bin.
Sorry to disappoint, but I do not consider an email about an email to Fremer as meaningful. If we search with google we find many rumors on the subject in the Internet, but never more than just gossip.
Even today no one has elaborated a complete list of MFSL tittles stating those who have a digital step by listening - the audiophile community is politely and lazily expecting MoFi to update the information on their site.
I am using a Tascam DA-3000 to encode, and a Lampizator Level 5 for DAC. The tape machine is a Nagra T Audio using my own tube tape head preamp.
(...) So, the fact is some of the golden ears did detect it!
Who???
Thanks. As far as I have read about the Tascam 3000 in gearspace.com and other professional forums the DSD mode of the recorder is better sounding than the PCM, in agreement with your opinion.
I got a Korg 2000 years ago on the advice of Gary Koh, but was disapointed with the results, even in DSD. I have been told that in order to have a "transparent" system we must move to an upper class - the Merging HORUS or HAPI units or equivalent.