Great article on "Analogue Warmth"

[esldude]

No it's not that real music might be colorful. Real music is colorful. Now if I can paraphrase JGH a device should pass music that sounds disconsonant when the source is disconsonat. If the source is not disconsonant then neither should the resultant sound. I can look up the exact quote if you wish.

Don't need the real quote, you are missing the point. If your recorded source lacks color (and they often do), then you aren't getting it back without a device that ADDS back in a general sort of way. There is no magic method to accurately colorize a source without color. You don't know the condition of the source material even though you know the condition of the live sound.

 

[Blizzard]

You aren't going to get to compare digital with phono and have the same master. That invalidates your judgment right there. No more need be said. Rarely indeed could you have the same master with tape though it is possible.

Now even were I to grant you your supposition, so a SOTA digital rig isn't as nice when people get to hear at SOTA analog rig (we talking $25k or $100k or what?). If it is only at that SOTA level analog edges out a bit ahead, then all you are really saying is analog is irrelevant to 99.9+% of audiophiles. So again, a big so what.

Another problem is, Mike has never heard SOTA DSD. There's no way on earth SOTA DSD is possible with a 70 cent high jitter clock. I'm sorry but I've been playing around with clocks and DSD for months. Low jitter, and DSD is extremely critical.

Here's the phase noise of the actual clocks I'm using in my chipless DSD rig. Please share the phase noise of the clocks in your so called SOTA DSD DAC. Let me guess what's coming next. "Jitter doesn't matter for DSD"

 

[Al M.]

Maybe if you are reading outdated whitepapers based on single rate DSD. Once we get up to quad DSD, those issues are no longer present. How many chipless DSD DAC's are you playing around with ATM at your place? How about DAC's with direct DSD bypass modes? How many times has the engineer behind the worlds most popular high end DAC chip been over to your place to have an in depth discussion on the matter?

Look, I am not the one who has presented technical arguments here. Keith (Purite Audio) did, for example. And in which manner is the whitepaper that he referred to outdated? Detailed technical rebuttal and technical explanation please. And no, just referring to the importance of clocking will not suffice.

As for the 'worlds most popular high end DAC chip ', technical implementation is no popularity contest.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

You aren't going to get to compare digital with phono and have the same master. That invalidates your judgment right there. No more need be said. Rarely indeed could you have the same master with tape though it is possible.

not true. there are easy to acquire digital and analog examples (including master tape) from the same mic feed. both with high rez PCM and dsd even Quad dsd. and I have done that specific exercise a number of times.

but even better would be lots of both in the same system using both SOTA sources. been doing that for years.

Now even were I to grant you your supposition, so a SOTA digital rig isn't as nice when people get to hear at SOTA analog rig (we talking $25k or $100k or what?). If it is only at that SOTA level analog edges out a bit ahead, then all you are really saying is analog is irrelevant to 99.9+% of audiophiles. So again, a big so what.

I did not make the generalization that 'many people prefer digital' with no qualification. I only responded to it questioning it's validity.

you are now trying to qualify it as Tim should have done but choose not to.

I can tell you that SOTA digital can get just as spendy as vinyl or tape. but even when that happens; game, set, match to the analog important only for those who care about such things and go to the trouble and effort to investigate.

 

[Blizzard]

Look, I am not the one who has presented technical arguments here. Keith (Purite Audio) did, for example. And in which manner is the whitepaper that he referred to outdated? Detailed technical rebuttal and technical explanation please. And no, just referring to the importance of clocking will not suffice.

As for the 'worlds most popular high end DAC chip ', technical implementation is no popularity contest.

Well for some reason you seem to think redbook is the holy grail of digital. Here's a simple impulse response chart that clearly shows the shortcoming with redbook vs DSD.

 

[Gregadd]

Don't need the real quote, you are missing the point. If your recorded source lacks color (and they often do), then you aren't getting it back without a device that ADDS back in a general sort of way. There is no magic method to accurately colorize a source without color. You don't know the condition of the source material even though you know the condition of the live sound.

I have to conclude that a recorded trumpet shouuld sound like a trumpet.

Read what I said.Iif a different music playesd through a device consistennly sounds bad it is the fault of the device not the recordings. If it were the fault of the recordings we would have to assume not only are they all bad but tthey are in a similar way. Highl unlikely.

 

[Blizzard]

not true. there are easy to acquire digital and analog examples (including master tape) from the same mic feed. both with high rez PCM and dsd even Quad dsd. and I have done that specific exercise a number of times.

but even better would be lots of both in the same system using both SOTA sources. been doing that for years.



I did not make the generalization that 'many people prefer digital' with no qualification. I only responded to it questioning it's validity.

you are now trying to qualify it as Tim should have done but choose not to.

I can tell you that SOTA digital can get just as spendy as vinyl or tape. but even when that happens; game, set, match to the analog important only for those who care about such things and go to the trouble and effort to investigate.

Mike I already debunked your claims earlier in this thread. Were you just waiting until they were several pages behind before you decided to start over at the beginning again like a broken record, with the hopes people won't read those posts?


Once again:


This is the required gear to really compare DSD 256 and Analog R2R:


1- very good sounding Analogue master tape
1- High end R2R machine
1- Merging HAPI or Horus with premium ADC board.
1- Merging Pyramix workstation with all required high end cables etc.
1- High end, and highly revealing audio system that has an analog input
1- SOTA DAC designed for utmost transparency, and lack of coloration.(IE Merging NADAC)

Use the Hapi or Horus combined with the Pyramix workstation to clone the master tape in DSD 256. Do blind A/B comparisons of the R2R playing the original master, to the DAC playing back the DSD 256 "clone" of the R2R master.

Let us know the results.


Which boxes can you check on the list?

Let me add that Jan Eric Persson of Opus 3 records (a man who has 40 years of experience making some of the finest R2R recordings ever) had all the above boxes checked when he claimed not being able to tell the difference. And this is with master tapes he made his self and has been listening to for 40 years!

Perhaps your experience is greater, please explain how?

 

[Al M.]

Well for some reason you seem to think redbook is the holy grail of digital.

Where did I say that? You are being ridiculous. I said correctly that Redbook is where all the music is. That's different.

 

[Blizzard]

Where did I say that? You are being ridiculous. I said correctly that Redbook is where all the music is. That's different.

Then I told you to go visit Madfloyd to listen to redbook converted to DSD 128. Unfortunately his DAC doesn't do 256, but it will give you a taste of what's possible anyways.

 

[amirm]

Well for some reason you seem to think redbook is the holy grail of digital. Here's a simple impulse response chart that clearly shows the shortcoming with redbook vs DSD.

View attachment 24578

That's a marketing graph. My scope samples at 2.5 Ghz. It would 100 times better than DSD in time domain due to wider bandwidth. Yet it will stink for audio applications.

As with my scope, the speed/bandwidth of DSD comes at the expense of sample resolution. Noise shaping is used to compensate for that but you better have equipment that knows what to do with boatload of it above 20 Khz. Amps that oscillate and speakers/amps that intermodulation may not apply.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike I already debunked your claims earlier in this thread. Were you just waiting until they were several pages behind before you decided to start over at the beginning again like a broken record, with the hopes people won't read those posts?


Once again:


This is the required gear to really compare DSD 256 and Analog R2R:


1- very good sounding Analogue master tape
1- High end R2R machine
1- Merging HAPI or Horus with premium ADC board.
1- Merging Pyramix workstation with all required high end cables etc.
1- High end, and highly revealing audio system that has an analog input
1- SOTA DAC designed for utmost transparency, and lack of coloration.(IE Merging NADAC)

Use the Hapi or Horus combined with the Pyramix workstation to clone the master tape in DSD 256. Do blind A/B comparisons of the R2R playing the original master, to the DAC playing back the DSD 256 "clone" of the R2R master.

Let us know the results.


Which boxes can you check on the list?

Let me add that Jan Eric Persson of Opus 3 records (a man who has 40 years of experience making some of the finest R2R recordings ever) had all the above boxes checked when he claimed not being able to tell the difference. And this is with master tapes he made his self and has been listening to for 40 years!

Perhaps your experience is greater, please explain how?

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...ue-Warmth-quot&p=364211&viewfull=1#post364211

 

[Blizzard]

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...ue-Warmth-quot&p=364211&viewfull=1#post364211

I guess when all else fails, and you can't backup your claims, that might be the best thing you can do. Better yet, don't bother making the claims in the first place until you can back them up.

 

[Blizzard]

That's a marketing graph. My scope samples at 2.5 Ghz. It would 100 times better than DSD in time domain due to wider bandwidth. Yet it will stink for audio applications.

As with my scope, the speed/bandwidth of DSD comes at the expense of sample resolution. Noise shaping is used to compensate for that but you better have equipment that knows what to do with boatload of it above 20 Khz. Amps that oscillate and speakers/amps that intermodulation may not apply.

Yes and that is where quad DSD shines. It shapes the noise so high out of the audio range that it's no longer audible. It wasn't until I had this uber resolution pure DSD DAC that I could hear the differences between the DSD rates so vividly. HQplayer is awesome for experimenting as well.

 

[treitz3]

Blizzard, what you have said isn't against the rules as written but I will say this. Watch your tone sir. Please allow me to remind you of the Terms of Service of the WBF;

2 - Cordial participation is a key requisite of being a member in our forum. If in our opinion you are violating this rule, administrative action may be taken which may include termination of your membership and deletion of your posts with or without notice.

8 - Your forum administrators rule with a gentle hand. But should the occasion arise where we must take immediate and strong action, we will do so. In that case, our decisions are not subject to debate.

18 - While we rule with a gentle hand in managing the forum, we reserve the right to terminate membership of anyone that we believe in our sole opinion to be disruptive to the well being of the community.

The last TOS (#18) is what we would like you to pay very close attention too.

Be cordial, polite, respectful, engaging and informative in conversations, there will be no issue.

Tom

 

[treitz3]

Gentlemen, some recent posts have been deleted. Please remember that this is not your sandbox. Rules have been broken. Please do not read more into that. If one needs a refresher on the TOS of this forum, please refer to this;

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1207-Terms-Of-Service

It is not up to the membership to decide what is or what is not acceptable. It is up to the management team and the rules (Terms of Service) are clearly written. Abide by them and there will be no issue. FWIW, all further off topic posts will be deleted.

Tom

 

[Blizzard]

There's nothing personal in audio. I think we all have the same goal when it comes to achieving this warm analog sound. I know that I like it as well. As long as it doesn't come at the expense of details. But I do think there's more than 1 way to achieve this warmth. There's no reason for anyone to be hostile about new technology.

 

[Rodney Gold]

Commandment #18 .. thou shalt not troll

 

[Blizzard]

Commandment #18 .. thou shalt not troll

I think the final one in blue was the real issue

 

[audio-land]

Not true. I like the sound of digital better. Many people do.

Tim

Tim, Good for you. I wish I can enjoy digital as much as you do, unfortunately I can't. Great to be you since you can spend less money, effort and times. Sorry, i gotta clean these 12" dusty records.

 

[audio-land]

Yes the Price of the DCS Vivaldi is enticing ... Its convenience been 4 boxes.

I was referring Blizzard statement, which was general/mass market consumers.

As for the top gear, DCS Vivaldi is still less expensive and much more convenience than top analog gear.