Jump to content

audiozorro

  • Posts

    1167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Who do I trust as an expert in the CA Audio Field - three remarkable individual come to mind: Barry Diament - I thank him so much for his staunch recommendation of the LIO-8 as the finest ADC/DAC regardless of price that led me to purchase and enjoy this unit. I also thank him for his excellent remasterings of Bob Marley, my favorite artist, and his excellent 24/192 Equinox recording. Bruce Brown - I thank him so much for his recommendation of the Korg MR-2000S as the finest DSD recorder under $10,000. His strong recommendation led me to purchase the Korg that has been invaluable is digitzing some of my valuable vinyl to the DSD128 format. Ted Brady - I thank him very much for all the work he has contributed to the CA community, in particular his guidance for ripping SACDs. It is truly amazing that the process works so well for non-experts like me. AZ
  2. Great review Ted. I have been to the exaSound website several times and dreaming about my future purchases. For now all I have is my Korg MR2000S to play my DSD files even though I own the Auraliti PK90, which could be upgraded to play DSD, as well as several Windows and Mac computers that could be used when I ever get an external DSD DAC. Do you know if Auraliti has any plans to support multichannel DSD64/128?
  3. I guess I do not agree with the premise that long term listening is better for evaluating components. However, I will agree that long term listening is considered the most discriminating way to evaluate audio components. The OP says he uses an analogy to think about the question in a logically dangerous way. Personally I don’t think using an analogy is dangerous but I do think that his choice of using paintings for an analogy for music is somewhat flawed. Since music is a pleasure a better analogy would be food or sex. Perhaps with long term listening, eating or sexual activities you may become used to and more accepting of what you are being fed as it grows on you. But for most people it doesn’t take very long to discern something that sounds like crap, tastes like crap or feels like crap. You spit it out, move on or try to improve it or your enjoyment of it. So at the basic and most fundamental levels, long term listening, eating or mucking is not necessary or better. However to discern why, or discriminate why, you love or hate something, especially if subtle differences are involved, then long term engagement is necessary unless you have extensive experience and depth. We expect reputable food critics to evaluate food in short time and I would venture to say the same is true for reputable audio or sex critics that are not financially supported by the industry that they are critiquing. I believe few people have come to love something in time that they hated at first. I feel the majority of folks that love something at first come to love it less or dislike it as time goes by. Of course the lucky few are those who love something at first and are still in love with it years later.
  4. Doesn’t a lossless format refer to its ability to recreate the original data exactly? Thus if the original recording data is a 24 bit studio master file, how could any 16 bit or lower file be anything but lossy? Of course if one assumes that the 16 bit/44.1kHz CD is the original data then you and the labels have artificially lowered the requirements for lossless audio. And hence it is easy to state that 99% of the music in consumer hands is lossy. Perhaps someone can elaborate on the technical details of converting a 24 bit audio file to a 16 bit file and discuss what is lost. Conversely I would assume that upsampling or converting an original 16 bit file to a 24 bit audio file can always be reversed to recreate the original data? Personally I am satisfied with those labels that release music in various formats from low rez lossy files to high rez studio masters to give consumers a choice.
  5. The lossless / lossy line should be 24 bits. Nowadays, is there any reason to record at less than 24 bits? As far as sample rates, I prefer 176 kHz or DSD64 and higher for stereo but I am willing to accept 88.2 or 96 kHz for multichannel audio. True this line is arbitrary and for many meaningless, but advances in computer audio, digital transmission and digital storage allows the bar to be raised and free us from the limitations of old formats and standards. Perhaps the more meaningful standard would be a fractional comparison of the sonic qualities between the released album and the highest studio master that the label possesses (the Measurement Junkies should love this one). More and more labels will jump on the high rez digital bandwagon and offer us album releases with greater resolution, dynamics and clarity. Even older analog recordings (there’s gold in them hills) benefit as the decaying master tapes and records are preserved in DSD64 and DSD128 formats. We should all commend those labels willing to release their digital studio master files at affordable prices. And true, 24/88.2 and higher resolutions does not guarantee better sound but it is generally accepted that the studio masters represent the best recordings. And I suppose where a studio master is not up to the highest musical standards of high fidelity, there are several options for improvement including remastering, enhancing, removing flaws or as some ingenious labels have successfully demonstrated creating impressive music events that never actually occurred in history. I can’t say with authority how the music industry is doing, but I have never had so much great music available at my fingertips (a King’s treasure trove of music) and I have just scratched the surface.
  6. Why a linear power supply for the PK90-USB (and PK100) versus a battery power supply for the dX-USB HD? Why not a linear power supply for both or a battery power supply for both? Is the sonic improvement with these optional power supplies subtle (less than 10%) or significant (greater than 20%)? Will the Auraliti L1000 also have an optional power supply?
  7. Harry Pearson confirmed for me that my Acoustat 2+2 speakers and the Conrad Johnson Premier One were a match made in heaven. Through all the years that I owned them, the various homes that they occupied, they always sounded great. That's why I often disagree with folks who say the room is the most important thing, since that has not been my experience. With a solid state amp or lesser amp the Acoustats do not sound as good or great, but they still sound good. My newest speaker and amp acquisition, the Mini Maggies and the Vincent hybrid amp, do not sound as good as the Acoustat/CJ match, but regardless of what other amps I have tried, the Mini Maggies never sound abysmal and always sound good. Other speakers that I don't own but I have never heard sound bad regardless of the amp or room include: 1. Quad ESL-57 2. Acoustat 6600 3. MBL 101 4. Wilson Audio MAXX 3 5. Focal JM Labs Grand Utopia III 6. Joseph Audio Pulsars I am sure there are more speakers that will sound good regardless of the amp, but with the right amps these speaker will sound great. Perhaps this is just my delineation or definition of great and good speakers. Good speakers can sound great with the right amp, right speaker cables and proper room. With the wrong amp, wrong speaker cables and wrong room (excluding live empty rooms that will always sound bad for audio) these good speakers will usually sound bad. Great speakers will sound great with the right amp, right speaker cables and proper room. With the wrong amp (assuming power requirements are still met), wrong speaker cables and wrong room (excluding live empty rooms that will always sound bad for audio) these great speakers will usually sound good but not great.
  8. Lyric HiFi was the best high-end audio store I ever had the pleasure of visiting back in the 70s and 80s. Even though I could never afford the things I lusted for, I distinctly remember Michael Kay's gratuitousness in discussing audio as we listened to the huge Infinity IRS Reference System speakers powered with a huge Audio Research amp. If I only had $40K at the time, these babies could have been sitting in my home. Anthony Cordesman's article - A Search for the Ultimate Speaker - reminds me of my visits to Lyric and helpfulness of Michael Kay in high-end audio. A search for the ultimate speaker - Best of Audio
  9. I have to agree with both Musicophile and the Part-Time Audiophile. I believe the speakers make the biggest difference in sound signature and the source material (performance, recording, mastering, and copying) is most important. So in terms of equipment, find the speaker you love, find the amp that makes that speaker the most it can be, and find the pre that doesn't mess it up. Perhaps some speakers are very dependent on other things such as room, cables, other components and tweaks, but I could list several speakers that I never heard sound bad or so-so regardless of these other things or considerations. On the other hand there are too many speakers, and many very expensive speakers that sound bad if other things are not ideal or near perfect. Not that the great speakers will not sound even better under ideal conditions, but you will never walk away from these speakers without being impressed. That's why I am always amused by highly rated speakers that sound bad at hotel audio shows. IMO great speakers will never sound bad and with the right amp and source material will always sound great.
  10. I use the SOtM dx-USB-HD converter with my Auraliti PK90 USB. They work and sound great together, better than any of my Mac or Windows music servers that I have spent months on trying to improve and advance the sound quality that I still continue to do (after all it is a hobby). But with the Auraliti and SotM converter, all concerns of software or OS bloat and streamlining, hardware issues and tweaks, different software players and settings are nonexistent. With time no longer spent on those issue and improvements I can get back to ripping CDs, start ripping SACDs, continue to digitize LPs and of course listen to music. The article provided by tubesound mentions drivers for the Mac and Windows, but I wouldn’t know since the Auraliti doesn’t require anything. The optional battery/mains power supply mentioned in the article looks interesting, but I don’t feel that I am missing anything. Perhaps if the Auraliti folks reply I might be tempted to spend $450 on something that I don’t feel I need, instead of just buying more music. But as for direct comparisons with other converters, I have no experience or desire since I am well pleased with Auraliti/SOtM combination. In any case I think it is more important to compare and select excellent music servers and DACs than converters (the ideal or superior may be no converter at all).
  11. Late but not too late. I was vote 294 and there is still another day to go.
  12. Great interview and article. In this life or my next, I want to come back and work for Barry. Too bad he doesn't conduct a vacation bootcamp or dude ranch where vacationers pay to work with him for 1-2 weeks of pure fantasy.
  13. I would also be very interested to hear how the $1195 exD DSD Sonore DAC compares to the $4429 Signature Series Sonore DAC for PCM playback up to 192kHz. I didn't realize that the Mytek cannot do DSD via USB under Linux. The Mytek seems like the odd man out if EMM Labs, Meitner, dCS, and Playback Design can all do DSD via USB under Linux.
  14. Thanks WLVCA. The steps you listed were exactly the same steps I initially took with little success. I was able to import many of my DSD files by using Window Explorer to play a few files in JRMC and then create playlists. Then magically a few more DSD files and folders started to appear in my Library Tree. It's as though JRMC needed a little push to find my DSD folders and files. IMO JRMC's import capabilities are not as strong or reliable as MediaMonkey's, but the sonics of JRMC are superior to MediaMonkey's sonics.
×
×
  • Create New...