Great article on "Analogue Warmth"

[audio-land]

Of course you would never try it because you're trembling with fear from the thought that a cheap software program may enable a cheap chipless DSD DAC to outperform your precious $56k Trinity.

BTW, in 2018, I'll buy the Trinity off you for $500 I'm thinking it would make a good DAC for my garage system

Save your $500 for Trinity, better wait for another 10 years. In 2028, you can get $250 dac that sounds like analog. Or you better start your company soon but I guess, you are so busy writting 40-50 posts/days in this forum, much more on others.

 

[Rodney Gold]

Or you better start your company soon but I guess, you are so busy writting 40-50 posts/days in this forum, much more on others.

My thoughts exactly...

 

[Purite Audio]

Save your $500 for Trinity, better wait for another 10 years. In 2028, you can get $250 dac that sounds like analog. Or you better start your company soon but I guess, you are so busy writting 40-50 posts/days in this forum, much more on others.

Not sure that I want my digital to sound like analogue,but if you do then a NOS design with valve output provides a reasonable facsimile.
Keith.

 

[Groucho]

a NOS design with valve output

Ugh!

 

[Blizzard]

Its also on the DSP end. If you want to know an effective method of messing up an otherwise excellent digital recording, simply apply DSP and watch it go down the drain.

Not all DSP is equal. Unless your digital album is direct to 1 bit DSD from mic feeds or analog tape, there's been DSP applied to it already. With the DSP I'm talking about, DSP can be applied to DSD as well. This is beyond the level of DSP that's even available to the studios yet. The best available now is conversion to DXD to apply the DSP. And only the finest labels are even doing that.

 

[Blizzard]

Save your $500 for Trinity, better wait for another 10 years. In 2028, you can get $250 dac that sounds like analog. Or you better start your company soon but I guess, you are so busy writting 40-50 posts/days in this forum, much more on others.

Which other forums am I posting on? Maybe I have a impersonator

Don't worry I have busy bees all over the globe working on stuff as I post on the forum.

 

[Purite Audio]

Ugh!

But they are so tonally dense and timbreally circumspect.
Keith.

 

[Blizzard]

Not sure that I want my digital to sound like analogue,but if you do then a NOS design with valve output provides a reasonable facsimile.
Keith.

With the system I'm talking about, it doesn't have to sound like analog if you don't want it to. It can sound like just the untouched mic feeds, or if you desire you can add all the tonal density and timbral richness you want until it touches you deep down in your soul.

 

[Atmasphere]

Not all DSP is equal. Unless your digital album is direct to 1 bit DSD from mic feeds or analog tape, there's been DSP applied to it already. With the DSP I'm talking about, DSP can be applied to DSD as well. This is beyond the level of DSP that's even available to the studios yet. The best available now is conversion to DXD to apply the DSP. And only the finest labels are even doing that.

Are you aware this comment does not make complete sense?

 

[bonzo75]

Which other forums am I posting on? Maybe I have a impersonator

Don't worry I have busy bees all over the globe working on stuff as I post on the forum.

Rest assured no one will want to impersonate you. If you read your own posts, probably not you either

 

[audio-land]

With the system I'm talking about, it doesn't have to sound like analog if you don't want it to. It can sound like just the untouched mic feeds, or if you desire you can add all the tonal density and timbral richness you want until it touches you deep down in your soul.

Sorry Blizzard, could you please let us know your system from source to the end? Some photos will be helpful. We might retire and follow your path......to get the music deep down in our soul.

 

[Blizzard]

Are you aware this comment does not make complete sense?

I just read it over and makes sense to me. What isn't clear?

 

[Blizzard]

Sorry Blizzard, could you please let us know your system from source to the end? Some photos will be helpful. We might retire and follow your path......to get the music deep down in our soul.

When it's ready I'll let you know. I'm not going to publicly share all of the secrets with the competition

 

[FrantzM]

While I do not always agree with Blizzard, it would be more interesting to address his posts rather than continue the use of ad-hominem.

This said, let's try to see something here: Self-driving cars are not a dream but a reality. And we seriously think that what makes a tube amplifier sounds like it does cannot be replicated with digital means? Perhaps there is no great impetus to do it with us the audiophiles, representing an insignificant and inconsequential number. I simply don't know.
Having witnessed how Ripped LP can fool seasoned audiophiles and having read even here on the WBF how close (to the extent of not being able to distinguish) some Digital rip can be , I am forced to think that digital is more transparent than many would like to admit.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I suppose you would have to test drive this technology to know if it has a ways to go still. It's such high resolution it picks up everything. Even what we don't know how to measure yet. Much the same as if you connected a merging HAPI/Pyramix up to the outputs and made a DSD 256 copy.

Think of it as an ultra highend version of this, put for the playback chain, rather than the studio. Also DSD compatible up to 1024.

http://www.uaudio.com/uad-plug-ins.html



I was being scarcestic about the mic feeds. As some folks think we must add coloration after the mic feeds in order to obtain "audiophile grade" tonal density and timbral richness.

What do you imagine "ultra high-end" would do for software plug-ins?

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Its also on the DSP end. If you want to know an effective method of messing up an otherwise excellent digital recording, simply apply DSP and watch it go down the drain.

I think, more often than not, that onus is on the workmen, not the tools.

Tim

 

[bonzo75]

While I do not always agree with Blizzard, it would be more interesting to address his posts rather than continue the use of ad-hominem.

Maybe he can stop ad hominem of brands he hasn't heard? Fyi, there have been enough discussions on his points, since he repeats the same on every thread

 

[FrantzM]

Maybe he can stop ad hominem of brands he hasn't heard? Fyi, there have been enough discussions on his points, since he repeats the same on every thread

Bonzo

that wouldn't be an ad hominem ....

 

[Atmasphere]

I just read it over and makes sense to me. What isn't clear?

Not all DSP is equal. Unless your digital album is direct to 1 bit DSD from mic feeds or analog tape, there's been DSP applied to it already. With the DSP I'm talking about, DSP can be applied to DSD as well. This is beyond the level of DSP that's even available to the studios yet. The best available now is conversion to DXD to apply the DSP. And only the finest labels are even doing that.

Well, obviously such a recording system is pie in the sky- you said it yourself- its not available. Essentially therefore it does not exist. That makes your post a non-sequitur.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Audio engineers (more often "suit" producers, actually) did a fine job of making a mess of analog recordings with signal processing when all those software plug-ins were the hardware boxes they're modeled from. Less is more is really hard for people.

Tim