Weller LvB: A question of sound

[Gordon]

Finally tracked down an audio sample rate tolerance spec - issued by IEC as IEC 60948 -x but also an AES version and an EBU version. This document gives some useful information on timing and frequency parameters [slides 10 onwards] for professional use, and I guess that the equipment used by Chandos conformed to these standards:

http://www.ieee802.org/3/re_study/public/200505/garner_2_0505.pdf

You will see that the tolerances are quite tight.

[visualnickmos]

My simple question seems to have generated some very interesting comments and observations - and knowledgeable responses, for which I am grateful.

I just wanted to sum up;

* I was listening to CDs, not downloads

* I have no gadgets to check anything electronically

* I have only my ears, so what I did was to play the extracts from the site kindly provided by Cockney Sparrow, with the CDs, lining them up, (synchronizing?) as it were, so I could instantly switch from one to the other, in exact continuity - don't ask me how I managed that! - luck, I reckon...
The upshot being that there was no difference whatsoever in what I heard. I conclude that because the extracts on the site were the original Chandos CDs, they must be the 'right' ones, and because the CDs in my set (Musical Heritage label) sounded identical, must after all, also be 'right'.

Please forgive my clumsy explanation, but I am not at all knowledgeable of anything technical in this field. I use my ears to tell me that if it sounds right, it probably is right...

[Ferretfancy]

Very interesting, Gordon. As indeed all other contributions to this interesting thread have been.

Seconded! Gordon, today's news of the final discovery of gravitational waves complicates the issue still further, probably affecting the accuracy of that watch, still it was quite cheap!

Joking aside, I went last week to the exhibition entitled Otherworlds at the Science Museum South Kensington, what fantastic images of the Solar System!
You don't have to be an astronomical enthusiast to appreciate such astounding photography.

It once again raises a question that none of the TV pundits seem to answer. Consider the wonderful images of Pluto, taken in a very short space of time as the spacecraft sped past the planet. At this distance from the Sun, light levels must be very low, which means that the cameras must have amazing sensitivity. How are the results achieved given that so little time is available to make the exposures, and from a rapidly moving platform?

I realise that we are probably dealing with a rapid stream of pixels with error correction rather than conventional photography, but I would like to know more.

[Gordon]

* I was listening to CDs, not downloads

* I have no gadgets to check anything electronically

* I have only my ears, so what I did was to play the extracts from the site kindly provided by Cockney Sparrow, with the CDs, lining them up, (synchronizing?) as it were, so I could instantly switch from one to the other....The upshot being that there was no difference whatsoever in what I heard. I conclude that because the extracts on the site were the original Chandos CDs, they must be the 'right' ones, and because the CDs in my set (Musical Heritage label) sounded identical, must after all, also be 'right'.

In my previous posts above I was scratching around to find technical explanations for your experience and did not come up with anything conclusive and demonstrable. This latest of yours suggests that if there is anything wrong it is the source file. Why that should be so is hard to see which is where we came in. Failing that, the CBSO does play a bit flat or did for Weller who is no amateur!! I suppose one could try other recordings of theirs from around the same time?

[Cockney Sparrow]

Gordon - Visualnickmos has listened to his CD recordings, and compared them with the audio preview on Chandos's download site (The Classical shop). Whereas he raised the question whether there was a problem with the pitch in his CDs, he has established it is the same as the Chandos source file for the download......post #8 above:-

Good afternoon CS...............Thank you for the link. That has proved very useful. Brilliant, as I've just done a test, as it were, and they are exactly the same.

[visualnickmos]

Gordon - Visualnickmos has listened to his CD recordings, and compared them with the audio preview on Chandos's download site (The Classical shop). Whereas he raised the question whether there was a problem with the pitch in his CDs, he has established it is the same as the Chandos source file for the download......post #8 above:-

Evening, CS

Spot on.... that's exactly it; my concern was that my CDs (Music Heritage label) were different when compared to the original Chandos CDs. They weren't. They were identical. Therefore all is well(er)

[Gordon]

Evening, CS

Spot on.... that's exactly it; my concern was that my CDs (Music Heritage label) were different when compared to the original Chandos CDs. They weren't. They were identical. Therefore all is well(er)

Agreeed. We have established that the download file content is the same as that on the CDs. What we have not clarified is where the apparent pitch discrepancy that VN hears comes from and I got the impression that VN's concern was that pitch issue and wondered if his set of discs were not "kosher" [my words]. This is what he said:

The thing is, that (and I am NO expert in music, pitch, sound/recording techinques, etc, etc) when I listen to it it sounds to my inexpert and totally untrained ears, ever so, ever so slightly lower-pitched than others I have.

So has anyone else got these performances or listened to the download extracts and also heard a pitch issue?