D/A converters

[MrGongGong]

The "audible" range that is often quoted in these things is, i think, highly misleading
as Stockhausen points out in "How Time Passes" there is a continuum between pitch and Rhythm where at 20HZ or so (depending on the sound , of course) pitch becomes pulse. It's fairly hard to get a subwoofer that will play really low frequencies at all , even the high end Genelec systems only go down to 35hz (ish) ...

(there is a well know scientific flaw in Stockhausens ideas in this article which concerns attack transients......... but the basic concept is sound )

[Mahlerei]

I am tempted to go for 24 bit downloads because I like the idea of having better than CD quality. I think they are expensive when so much music on CD can be purchased for £1 or £2 a disc. Reading this article does make me wonder if there is really any point.

I tried some of the online hearing frequency tests yesterday - yes I know they are probably highly inaccurate, depend on my equipment and ambient noise levels - but they suggest that my audible range is between 30Hz and around 13,000Hz. I am not aware that I am hearing less than I used to - it still sounds good but clearly what happens above this level is going to be lost on me. Am I missing the point here as well as the overtones?

I had the opportunity to compare a 24/96 mastering (on CD) with a recent 24/96 download of the same recording. I genuinely didn't expect to hear a difference, but the latter is in another league altogether. True, it costs £18 (as opposed to less than a tenner for the CD) but the improvement in terms of sheer 'presence' and involvement is just astonishing.

But wait, there is a downside; not all such downloads are equal, and some are downright dull. But isn't that always the case with recorded music? In this case I suspect the original engineers - Kenneth Wilkinson and Gordon Parry - got it right and the remastering (from the original tapes) was also done with care. The result: a glorious recording in every respect.

[Stunsworth]

But wait, there is a downside; not all such downloads are equal, and some are downright dull. But isn't that always the case with recorded music? In this case I suspect the original engineers - Kenneth Wilkinson and Gordon Parry - got it right and the remastering (from the original tapes) was also done with care. The result: a glorious recording in every respect.

Solti Mahler 8?

[Mahlerei]

Solti Mahler 8?

Yes indeed. Obviously those patches of distortion/compression are still there but the rest is fab.

[robk]

Does this mean that it not so much the higher resolution of the file that gives the improvement but avoiding losses created in the process between the master and the CD?

[Mahlerei]

robk

I honestly don't know the answer to that, although in principle the best high-res music - SACD or downloads - does seem to offer more ambient information that makes for a more realistic listening experience.

[Stunsworth]

Yes indeed. Obviously those patches of distortion/compression are still there but the rest is fab.

I've been very tempted by that download myself.

[jayne lee wilson]

Well, yes, the listener indeed, but the biggest shock of my listening life was auditioning ATC Active SCM-50 speakers, realising just how much most "hifi" leaves out! I guess the biggest lesson was, don't listen to things you really can't afford, but it taught me more about sound quality and the effects of and on recording than anything else, apart from concerts themselves...

Mahlerei - obvious point really, but one needs to take into account all the variables in the chain of reproduction, i.e. disc transports versus computer sources, cables, DAC settings etc. I find a consistent extra warmth using the Macbook as source even comparing a lossless download with its CD equivalent using the Krell's Teac transport for the disc - the latter perhaps slightly deeper-staged, with marginally more precise imagery etc. Slight enough to be down to cables, even... one just wonders if the Mahler 8 CD may be affected by factors other than bitrate/sampling rate, e.g. jitter.

I'm not sure what difference that makes ?

And wasn't accusing you of being a fool , only that there is plenty of (oxygen free surgically enhanced copper ) woo about.
Having done plenty of sessions in studios with equipment that's worth more than my house it's very clear that the thing that affects sound quality more than anything else is the listener......

24 bit is a significant advance in some circumstances, I would always now record and edit in 24 bit particularly if i'm making something electroacoustic and am going to do extreme timestretching etc even if the final thing is going to end up on a CD.

[MrGongGong]

You need to go to a few BEAST gigs if you want an orgy of ATC / Genelec lovelyness then
I find ATCs a bit harsh for listening for long periods of time and get very tired ears if i'm using them (not that I could afford a pair !) for working on things though they are a favourite of many electroacoustic composers.

The studio at the ROH has a 5:1 B&W system which is rather nice to work with but more than a little dangerous as you can easily end up with a balance that will make your home HiFi speakers fall off the shelves EVEN after comparisons with a pair of auratone cubes

[jayne lee wilson]

Way off-topic here... but I too found the ATCs, ultimately, fatiguing despite my admiration for what they did - as I put it at the time, "I like them but my ears aren't so sure" ....the match made in heaven, still here years later, was ATC pre/power amps driving Harbeth C7s + Townshend Supertweeters.

You need to go to a few BEAST gigs if you want an orgy of ATC / Genelec lovelyness then
I find ATCs a bit harsh for listening for long periods of time and get very tired ears if i'm using them (not that I could afford a pair !) for working on things though they are a favourite of many electroacoustic composers.

The studio at the ROH has a 5:1 B&W system which is rather nice to work with but more than a little dangerous as you can easily end up with a balance that will make your home HiFi speakers fall off the shelves EVEN after comparisons with a pair of auratone cubes

[Mahlerei]

On a related topic I use foobar 2000 on my PC but also want a media player for the Mac. VLC a good choice? Or Songbird?

[jayne lee wilson]

I've used XBMC for about 2 years on a 4 year-old Macbook, you can read about it at Pristine Classical's website.

It's very slick to operate, has lots of library options, and it's easy to switch off all the sonic adjustments. It also happens to look lovely too, large white script on a black background, cover art nicely sized. There's a choice of appearances, I think the "Confluence" skin looks best.
My only frustration so far with it is not having worked out how to quickly read off the bitrate/sampling rates for a given file, but I'm sure that's down to my own limitations. Anyone?

On a related topic I use foobar 2000 on my PC but also want a media player for the Mac. VLC a good choice? Or Songbird?

[Mahlerei]

jayne

Many thanks, I hadn't heard of that one. Will investigate pronto. From the ones I've used in the past - VLC, foobar, Songbird - all seem to have annoying quirks.Thanks again.