Not wasting my time on new Digital

Eldartford,

Ditto! I was about to say the same thing.

The problem starts with the recordings. I have witnessed A-B tests between a SOTA ($60K+) vinyl setup and certain Digital only to find out that, with the same record title, some sound better on the Digital and some better on the Vinyl.

Believe or not!

Regards,
Alex

Viridian: I am loathe to insert myself into the middle of this one, but I can't make sense of your statements

"...analog, both tape and LP, has greater dynamic range than redbook CD. Sounds can be heard between ten and twenty db beneath the noise floor on analog. Digital media simply throw away all information below the least significant bit"

"in analog, not digital, replay, sounds can be heard 10db to 20db into the noise floor and this leads to analog replay having a greater dynamic range than redbook CD"

Taking for granted, for the sake of argument, the assertion about audibility below the noise floor with analog, I can't see any connection between that supposed fact, and drawing the conclusion that therefore digital must have less dynamic range. Even if the stipulation about audibility is true, it seems to me the comparison would be wholly dependent on where the analog noise floor actually falls in relation to the bit-depth of a particular digital format. If, for instance, an analog format has a noise floor 20dB higher than the LSB of a digital format, then they should have equal dynamic range by your argument. But even so, taking the noise floor of the analog into account, the digital should have superior low-level resolution.

Personally, I'm not sure that any of this stuff actually has much to do with the perception of 'dynamic' sound (or whether dynamics has anything to do with D_Edwards contention about digital and multichannel, for that matter). But regardless, your inference does seem like a non-sequitor to me.

Viridian...Your question, "Where, as you assert, did I say that sounds 10 to 20db below what is audible are things that you should "care" about?" is one that I cannot answer because the posting has been (conveniently) deleted.

Thanks for the link. Interesting, but I have seen it before.

In my multichannel system (5 channels contributing noise) I never hear noise with digital sources. With LPs, quiet passages almost always have enough audible noise to bother me. (Perhaps I am more sensitive to this than you are). My spectrum analyser clearly shows why this is so.

I have no special record cleaning equipment, and I am talking about ordinary LPs: not special audiophile editions. While the noise floor of the LP system is pretty well defined by the technology, the maximum signal can be anything that the recording engineer thinks his customers' cartridges can track. Most LPs intended for the general public have been compressed and peak-limited so that Joe sixpack can play them.

By the way, I think that dynamic range is not the most important parameter. Sometimes I find that quiet passages, even without noise, are difficult to hear unless the volume is cranked up so much that the loud passages are ear-splitting. Too much of a good thing.

I'd like to hear more from D_Edwards on the specifics of his setup and how we can learn to take advantage of what digital offers. His comments were refreshing, whether right or wrong. I can live with my cd's being crunched and massaged through the various digital algorithms that the various surround sound modes offer. After reading his statements I started looking at processor offerings in the 4-5K range and it seems there is are quite a few new surround modes since I bought my receiver 7 years ago. PLII, tri-field, etc. and it seems that every manufacturer has their own proprietary 2-channel mix mode designed for CD's. I'm curious as to what they are trying to accomplish with these modes though. Are they simply trying to simulate what a good 2-channel system can do with sound imaging, depth, etc? I've heard more than one 2-channel setup that when done in a room that has been treated, fills the entire room. Again, his comments were a refreshing change from the usual, is this amp, better than that one, etc. Digital is here to stay and he brings some fresh assumptions. Especially for those of us that don't listen to audiophile grade recording. Hey if you can clean up the sound and make it more enjoyable, I'm all for it.
I've got half a mind to pick up an Anthem D1 and give it a whirl. My receiver is on the fritz as it is.

Hey Snipes,

A quik answer, YES!!! My very budget surround system linked in my audiogon info, has "blown away" 2 channel systems that cost more. I put blown away in quotes because that is the same quote used by four different people after hearing the system listed recently. And trust me they were in the same state of disbelief you're feeling now when they said it. I don't expect you to believe me anyway...just come on by and hear for yourself anytime.

Now what I find amusing is this is a very entry level system with a very nice receiver and some speakers I build myself. What do you think a Meridian 861 and ATC's would sound like compared to two channel systems? I know what J Gordon thinks.

And YES, that "blown away" comment was addressing the systems ability to playback redbook 2 channel cd's in a limited PLII format as you would expect to hear them from a two channels system. All voices and instruments in a wide deep front soundstage, but with a naturalness you might just begin to find in the Meitner products with two channels. But maybe not.

D1 is a good choice, anything Meridian makes is the best for music, they give you so much control I can mimic other two channel and multi channel systems. But not any processor will do. Believe it or not, not all surround processors are competent. Some leave out critical adjustments that cripple the ability of the processor to do music well. Setup flexibility and EQ is very critical.

D, If you read my post and assumed that I was a disbeliever, than you misinterpreted me. I'm curious and you have piqued my interest. I'm intrigued by your statements and would like to hear more about your setup. How many speakers, what the various surround modes do to the mix, what other type of configuration settings did you do with regards to the processor, etc? So far what I've gathered from your posts is that the vast majority of people aren't listening to digital properly. OK, but can you give us specifics on your setup. Are there component do's and don't? I'm almost interpreting your statements to imply any properly setup HT music system in a dedicated room that has been acoustically treated is the ticket. All one has to do is pick the proper surround mode.
Please shed some light.

Thanks

I'm not sure that digital is a waste of time without multichannel, but it is true that MC is the greatest factor for improvement over analog (for us poor guys who don't have $80,000 LP playback gear). In particular, for someone who will not install multichannel equipment, I doubt that SACD or DVDA is a big upgrade over CD.

I have many 2-channel discs and LPs, and have experimented with many of the matrix systems that can derive multichannel from a stereo source. Almost always I find the result problematical. There is a compromise however, three (not five) channel, and there is a product (SST Trinaural Processor) that "Blows Away" (sorry about that) all the other systems. You can read my review here or at the Imperii Audio website. Kal also had a favorable review in our favorite rag.

No, snipes, I just assumed you hadn't heard it that is all.

And my writing meant to imply that you're welcome to come see/ hear anytime and ask more questions. It was to be a friendly invitation, not a desuasion or persuasion.

Just bad writing :(

Ask away,

Referring to the system you can link too.

My setup is very linear +/- 1.5dB 200-20khz, all 6 speaker are exactly the same, 2 subs with eq, +/- 3db 20hz to 200hz all satellites are setup at the same height except the center, this is for demo purposes only. As people new to the surround format always say they can here the sound directly out of the center channel, even when I'm (tricking them) only playing two channels. :)

You want this kind of flat accurate speaker for surround, because the surround algorithms do diffuse the sense of detail slightly and having a speaker that might be "bright" or "too exact" for normal listening will be great for surround.

The best music format for our purposes is Trifield, Dolby Prologic II is a godsend for many manufacturers giving them access to a very coloration free surround mode.

The rest are to colored to be options.

note on my center channel;

By lowering the speaker a few inches it fully seperates the center sound from the center channel as the voices image above the speaker, disconnecting two strong visual cues. Normally all speakers at the same height.

Cambridge Audio Receiver is very good, the introduction of two ex-TAG McLaren engineers is paying big dividends. When it comes to buying the right equipment for surround, there is a great deal of info to consider. So to keep my posts from being outrageously long, email me because when you say the wrong thing about the right product the noise online gets to be problematic and distracting.

I leave you with one last thought.

A Home Theater will not necessarily make a great music surround system

But a music surround system makes for a great Home Theater.

D edwards

I played around with a SS music system... Sony XA-777es sacd player...Krell amps, Apogee speakers. Good SS software was fairly limited at the time (a couple years ago).

Another SS system (I still have this one)...Pioneer 563A sacd/Dvd-Audio player...Omkyo amps, VMPS speakers. This system has been used strictly for hometheater...I guess I should order some disc's and give this system a listen playing music?...It's been a while.

Dave

D Edwards,thanks for the details thats the type of info I was looking for. Like quite a few people on this forum, I have a combo 2 ch. / HT setup. If I could pare down the equipment to one set AND improve the music experience that would be great. I'm in Atlanta, I believe you said you were in the north east someplace. If I know ahead of time I'm coming up that way I'll get a hold of you. What genre of music do you primarily listen to? Also, I'm very surprised more people haven't jumped in on the thread, I get a feeling quite a few are lurking around. Normally this would have turned into a pissing contest by now. Thanks for the inspiration. The ATC's look interesting as well, I bet the really do Rock and HT well.

Hey Snipes,

Sorry for the lag time, let me answer your questions first;

"What genre of music do you primarily listen to?" It easier to describe what I don't listen too, I don't listen to Brubeck, Davis, DeMeola (GRP) type jazz, Very little country, No gangsta rap, and bagpipes.

But everything else is fair game,

"I believe you said you were in the north east someplace"
Baltimore/ Reading PA

"I'm very surprised more people haven't jumped in on the thread."

Everything I've written in this thread I have been writing on various boards for the last 7-8 years, I am not surprised.

Normally this would have turned into a pissing contest by now.

Most people have so little quality experience with surround it is dismissed not something to fight about.

"The ATC's look interesting as well, I bet the really do Rock and HT well."

The ATC's do everything well, large classical being where they can really seperate themselves with that midrange from most audiophile speakers. But there are few speakers that I can think of that can play Megadeth to Norah Jones with the same veracity and quality of two very different types of "rock/pop" music.

DAVE,

no special discs required, just setup your surround as it is now. I'm looking for someone with a system that I can help over the phone get their system correct. (snipes same for you) No takers yet. What center channel do you have?

And to top all of this off, now we have Blue Ray technology coming to the forefront from the same wonderful people that gave us SACD and DVD A. I absolutely refuse to invest in this, till it is totally proven. We all know the current fiasco regarding SACD and DVD-A. Please Sony, enough is enough.

And to D-edwards, yep I am an aging baby boomer. Been in this hobby/business since 1957, owned and sold more gear that you can possibly fathom. I do take offense as being dismissed as nothing more than a relic.

Got into digital the day it hit the streets. In fact when I purchased the first CD Player, there was only 25 CD titles in the Schwanns Catalog. Digital has its place as does analog. Also have had a very expensive Lexicon HT system. Great for movies, total dreck for music.

For all the prowess that Digital provides, when it comes to accurate musical reproduction, it is only of late, that the promise of digital is coming to light, but the jury is still out for me. It takes a damn expensive digital player to get music,not movies, to sound correct.

While it's not clear whether HD DVD or Blu-ray will win out, one of them surely will. Because unlike SACD and DVD-A, these new formats have compelling benefits for the mass market.

For what it is worth. Once again Sony wants to re-package and re-sell their existing library. This marketing strategy always fails. No one with any common sense, no matter how good Blue Ray or HD DVD may or may not be, is going to spend hundreds to thousands of dollars to re-populate what they already own in an existing format.

If Blue Ray or HD DVD is a superior process, it will have to very right straight out of the box and have such a dramatic impact to make all other digital forms obsolete immediately. Thats an almost impossible task, due to the fact that costs at the retail level cannot exceed the magic $399.00 for a launch of a new format player. Software has to be priced very near current levels. At present all I see is a lot of red ink to be overcome. And for the consumer another format to deal with, that has all the potential of another SACD or DVD-A demise, that leaves consumers with outdated formats, that consumers paid far to much for. Till proven different, I believe this to be another fad, with zero substance.

There is a need for a new digital system to raise the bar, that we have had since 1982, but major breakthroughs do not occur often and are not priced at entry level consumer gear in the initial launch. In 1982 I paid a very hefty price for a first generation CD Player and the first CD discs were very expensive, when compared to the analog LP of the same period.

With Blue Ray and HD DVD I do not see that happening. These new operating systems will have to hit the decks running and the return on investment to Sony will have to be swift. Entry level consumer electronic products, due to their mass market nature, will not have the build, parts, or reliability quality to ensure consumer confidence after the launch.

But, I am always ready to be impressed beyond my wildest expectations, which happens all to infrequently and after 48 years in this hobby business, major breakthroughs I can count on the fingers of one hand. I spent a lot of years at CBS/Columbia and well remember the Quad disaster of 1975. There is not a better mouse trap, only major break throughs that deliver the promise, and that technology is expensive to R&D and deliver to the market place.

Both CD and DVD offered advantages to consumers that made them a no-brainer to adopt once software became plentiful and hardware prices dropped. With the new DVD formats, the advantages are clearly less but they are more compelling than just "better sound". Through mainstream systems, the better sound of SACD and DVD-A was not better enough. But I think the better picture of the HD DVD formats (on HD displays) will be better enough, and combined with the greater capacity of the discs, you have something that will move consumers to upgrade. And the barriers to adoption are fairly low. The new players will play old DVDs, correct? So you won't replace your old collection necessarily, but you may be motivated to get a new DVD player by the prospect of buying (or renting) an entire season of Deadwood on a single disc.

The improved PQ of 1080p over DVD's current 480p is pretty obvious and most of us who have HD displays, even if not 1080p, will go for an HD player as soon as Netflix starts offering the formats on a good number of new or interesting older releases. Netflix, along with Blockbuster, has some power in how this plays out (which formats do they offer?). The studios probably have more power.

Blu-ray at least promises interactivity, and I imagine that what this really means is you'll be encouraged to buy things directly while watching content. That's a big enough carrot to drive development of some pretty clever promotions, which may suck consumers in.

The next generation of broadband into the home is a wildcard here if HD on-demand begins to materialize.

I only wish Viridian was totally on target with his assesment. However the numbers do not support his views.

Before CBS/Columbia made the hugh committment to jump into the then new CD technology, we formed focus groups in several parts of the country to evaluate consumer trend in this medium. Would they pay the $800.00 for the entry level player? Would they pay near twice the price for the software? Would they buy titles they already have in LP or Cassette ? The list goes on, but that was crux of what needed to be evaluated. The results from these focus groups was an overwhelming resounding YES!!! So armed with that the plunge was taken.

Guess what? Did not happen in the numbers expected, in fact nowhere even close. Wish the hell it did, would have saved a ton of jobs. Also resistance at the retail level was another area encountered, that was not foreseen. Retailers had to regear themselves to accomodate this new medium. All of this held true for Capitol and RCA as well.

Even new releases in both LP and Cassette and the newer CD format, the LP contiuned to outsell the CD by a far margin until about late 1988 some seven years after the introduction of the CD Players and by that time the price of CD Players had fallen dramatically, but prices on CD software remained much the same.Software prices remained high losses had to be recovered from previous years, and have remained high since.

Comparing DVD Video to Music CD is an apple to oranges comparison. Music CDs are bought individually and are added to ones library. On the other hand DVD Video is a different animal. If it was not for the vast majority of rental libraries such as Blockbuster and the like the DVD Video market would near collapse under its own weight.

Case in point in my own vast collection I have precisely three CDs that I already have on the LP format. If I posses it in LP or Cassette, I see zero reason to add the same title in CD format. And to this day not everything has been transferred to CD. Same holds true for the DVD Video format.

We will see if Sony with Blue Ray can weather a 7 year storm in this day and time. However thier recent debacle with SACD and DVD-A proves otherwise. The Corporate environment has changed dramatically in recent years, no longer will Corporations pour resources into a medium that show a poor return. Now its all about the numbers, there are no more visionaries heading these Corporations now. And in the final analysis it is the end consumer that ends up with an obsolete purchase.

D_Edwards: My center channel is a hold over from my previous mains. It's a Vienna Acoustics Maestro or Theatro. I don't recall. It's a good sized center channel, but will be replaced at some point to match my mains. My LFE went out on my receiver recently, Yamaha RXV-995 so its a good enough excuse to replace it and try something along the lines of what you suggested. Like I stated earlier, I'd love to be able to cut down to one set of gear that handles music and HT well. My listening space is my living room right now. I'm hoping to put the house up for sale in the next month or two. Next place will have a basement, which translates to "I can do what I want down there". I don't plan to make any drastic changes in my current space as the room already has too many problems. When I'm ready, I'll shoot you an email for advice. Thanks.

sony has to figure out another way to generate a royalty now that their cd patent has run out. this was the reason for sacd,which was a flop. i thought there was alot of issues with cd's myself unitl i had aberdeen components mod my tact millenium mk3 and a northstar 192 transport. this transport can be used as 16/44.1 or upsampled at 24/96. the 24/96 works toghether with the dac's in the tact amp and sounds the best to these ears. the mod aberdeen accomplished is the best digital i have heard since digital came out. i am listening to many cd's that i deemed unlistenable. aberdeen components has overcome the many complaints we all have had with digital. when i heard the amp and transport for the first time. i was shocked at how good digital can really sound.a previous mod to my tact amp sounded lifeless and broken compared to what i am hearing now. i have had people over and asked how my cd's can sound so much better than what they have at home. it was also good to hear after the mod, the company proclaim the tact millenium mk3 amp the best sounding amp they ever heard. it should be a test piece for the rest to be compared against. i know everyone has heard these statements before, but the aberdeen components mod is THE REAL DEAL !!!! this is not some gimicky mod that you dont know what you are getting. you can call them and they will be glad to tell you what and why what they do works. their email is [email protected]