Jump to content

jcbrum

  • Posts

    77
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Banned
  1. quote - "I know of some very knowledgeable engineers who have measured differences between Apple Lossless files and AIFF files. They measured the files, once a sonic difference was heard in an A/B comparison, " - endquote. This is baloney. The only difference between alac and aiff lies in the way the info is stored on the hdd. it's just a more efficient way of using the disk space. The sonic information is identical and fully created before presentation to the dac. A bit perfect aiff is easily created from an alac. There is no sonic difference in any test, including abx. JCBrum.
  2. Chris, you made a mistake when you barred Ashley, and you should correct it at the earliest opportunity, - like now. This forum, if it is to be the best, MUST be bigger than any individual, and that means it must be able to accomodate Ashley as well. He is an important person in Hi-Fi, being one of the controlling directors of one of the most important Hi-Fi companies in the world. You may not like what he says, and you should say so, and why, if that is how you feel, but it MUST be done in debate, and with decorum. You simply cannot deny him the opportunity to post his point of view and at the same time maintain your own credibility. It's just not possible, - sack him and you might as well sack yourself, because no-one will give ever give you respect or credibility again if you simply silence anyone you don't agree with. Ashley does not post here as a sales exercise, he is genuine in his interest for Hi-Fi, - it's a hobby for him as well as us and he is an excellent convert to digi-audio. AVI marketing is not centered around this forum and that should be obvious to all. Therefore you should not censor him for his personal opinions, - we all have those, and are entitled to them. You should re-consider Chris, and not censure anyone simply for their opinions, and who is not grossly offensive in their posts. Simply tell Ashley you have changed your mind, - you don't have to agree with him. If any one else agrees with me please post in support. JCBrum.
  3. Mr Cooper ( I know where you live!), Please cease and desist from saying that I'm part of Ashley's, or AVI's team. I have no connection with them other than I'm an enthusiastic user of their products, and as a result have become firm friends with Ashley and Martin. If you say this again I'l sue you you bastar*. I mean it. Chris - CA, if you delete this post I'll sue you too, for aiding and abetting coops and attempting to conceal his crimes, namely LIBEL. I notice a member of this forum is calling himself JC and putting up spoof posts. No doubt it is someone who is trying to discredit me, possibly to do with the Ashley situation. Chris you must not hide the real identity of this person and allow him to be confused with me. If you do I shall allege complicity by you in this matter. I raise these issues because coops has erroneously accused me of posting on the 'Art of Sound' forum. What actually happened was that forum was hacked by the same kind of troublemakers as are connected with CA now. Posts were made allegedly using my ID, which were actually made by third parties with malicious intent. I suspected the operator of the forum - Marco, and his cronies, some of whom are posting on CA now, but was not given access to their records and equipment. In fact they banned me instead - how convenient for them ? Marco had a long track record of hacking forums using false ID's and making offensive posts, before he started 'Art of Sound with his cronies. It seems to me that CA is being infiltrated by the 'usual suspects', and you are being suckered into joining them Chris. It's a free country, just, (if you don't break the law Coops), and you can run CA how you choose Chris, but undesirable elements which have arrived at CA recently will be it's downfall, not people like Ashley James, Darren, Tim F, and me, who are respectable, independent, free-thinking folk, not in anyones pocket. JCBrum.
  4. Er, isn't that one's Mac plugged into one's adm9.1's ???
  5. I will second your thoughts and feelings Tim. If others agree, they too should speak up please. JCBrum.
  6. Quote Kevin " -So, if I understand it, even if I wanted to experiment with an external DAC that could handle some of the higher sample rates from HDTracks etc, I have no way to output a signal out of the mini. I am limited to the AIFF format of my cd's and the AIFF downloads I have purchased? And I assume then, that there are no other tweaks I should consider?" endquote. No Kevin, thats completely incorrect. You can connect any firewire or usb dac or sound card you like and use any bit-rate or format you choose. Most modern stuff is either firewire or usb connectors, both of which are provided on the MacMini. JCBrum.
  7. Maybe it's a UK thing ? (free upgrade to 256aac) JC. ps. Usernaim250, proper vinyl on a proper record player doesn't have surface noise, - mine don't. (well the junk shop one's do, - that's why they were in the junk shop !)
  8. In my case I had a number of 128aac's which I purchased a while ago. Recently I Purchased some 256kaac and iTunes offered to upgrade all my 128's to 256 free of charge. It might have been a special offer, but I think it's standard practice now, whereas it used to cost 20p per song. So perhaps their master plan is to keep customers happy instead ?? JCBrum.
  9. Kevin, I think that AVI meant that if you only required playback facilities, as opposed to recording facilities as well, then the optical toslink output on the mini connected directly to adm9.1 optical input was entirely satisfactory. If however in the future you wished to experiment with external sound cards or dacs, then the mini does provide a satisfactory array of alternatives such as usb, and firewire, which with an appropriate device will handle up to 24/192 files both record and playback If you are using the mini to play or rip CD's into your library all your files will be 16/44.1 since that is the CD standard, and the mac mini and adm9.1's can easily accomodate or exceed that up to 24/96 without any additions. I found rosevals advice to you to be confusing and innapropriate for you and possibly best ignored at the moment. Kind regards and good luck with your audio proposals. JCBrum.
  10. It is important to know that the compression codecs have been improved a lot recently with new versions of most of them. In the examples given by the previous poster (usernaim250), I have done those tests on an abx basis frequently for the last 6 or 7 years. Firstly an iPod cannot play red-book, only cdp's and computers can do that, so there must be a mistake there somewhere, or it was not an iPod playing. (the test is invalid unless the same source device is used for all samples). Perhaps the iPod was playing a lossless file, or wav, or aiff. 256aac (standard nowadays), and 320mp3, are extremely hard to identify in a proper abx context, particulary if vbr is used. I suggest anyone who wishes to place reliance on such a test, should repeat it with up to date codecs, and try wav or lossless (should be the same), 256aac-vbr, and 320mp3-vbr. (all available in iTunes 8.1) I haven't found anyone yet who can reliably tell the difference in a properly conducted test using those settings. It does beg the question however, why use compression anyway ?? JCBrum.
  11. The Edirol UA25 is excellent for sound quality, costs about £200, and has full control over the input level. Use jack to phono adapters in the high imp inputs as already suggested. I've done heaps or records with one of those. JCBrum.
  12. quote PeterSt - "Rememer, the one thing vinyl just CAN NOT do opposed to digital." Dunno what you mean ?? I think I know what Tim meant - "Natural, of course, is impossible to ascertain with electronic music." - and I agree. But I don't know whether I agree with you because I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Records and CD's and downloads are all consumer products, and as such are 'copies', - facsimiles, - replicas, if you like, of the original recording, - whatever instrument made it, be it voice, trumpet, or synthesizer. It's just that the vinyl copy is always flawed to some degree whereas the digital is not necessarily so. I can't see that this makes any distinction for a synthesized sound, since it is valid for every case. JCBrum.
  13. jcbrum

    XXHighEnd

    If it's so different, ........ are you sure that it's all the others that are wrong ? ........... JC.
  14. I've been using, buying, and making, hifi kit and recordings for the last 40 years, and I've had and used some pretty posh stuff. (still do !)(I've just sold two racks full of Studer-Revox kit) How anyone can say iPods are not Hi-Fi is beyond me. A good example which I use myself, frequently, is an iPod shuffle straight into AVI speakers with a sub. Playing good files it will give a better sound than pretty well anything from previous generations of equipment. Including valve amps and horn loudspeakers. (are you listening coops). I can only conclude that the - " I like what I've got and am used to" - syndrome applies. A good Mac laptop, can, just, beat it, but I can't agree with the "no-where near" assessment. A lot of '70's, '80's, and particularly '90's kit was awful, mentioning no naims, considering what it cost. Regards JCBrum
  15. jcbrum

    Pure Vinyl

    This may be of passing interest, ....... http://www.alanturing.net/turing_archive/pages/blumlein/index.html http://www.doramusic.com/blumleinmainmenu.htm JC.
×
×
  • Create New...