Jump to content

GB

  • Posts

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie
  1. No sense to compare to Toslink. Toslink is at the soundcard's output carrying audio stream, and "Adnaco" fiber optic connection is at soundcard's "in-computer-input", PCI or PCIe bus, which doesn't know even the word "sound".
  2. The DAC may be even without optical input. Use http://www.adnaco.com/ solutions, and you will have your PC by optical link up to 300 meters away from soundcard with S/PDIF out (or PCI USB card), which can reside near DAC...
  3. Why synthesizers? Simply generators...One transistor is enough... Well, talking about piano and flute, I forgot this. But in case of synthesized music - how can we say when it's played correctly? All synthesized music is one big artefact. Only author can identify...
  4. Sorry, a1 is 440 Hz. I've meant Helmholz notation.
  5. "It depends on whether you're talking about the fundamental or the harmonics" - fundamental, of course. "A piccolo goes up one more octave to C8 at 4186 Hz. Now a whistle is in the flute family and surely a whistle can be imagined that is capable of the frequency extremes mentioned by wg. :)" - ultrasonic whistles exist also, but it's not about music. I mean, no sence to take into consideration FUNDAMENTAL tones (seems to me, it's called "pitch" in English) over 5 kHz. Music doesn't contain them.
  6. Sorry, A1 is 440 Hz, A2 - 880, A3 - 1760, A4 - 3520, A5 - 7040, A6 - 14080... You say flute can play in sixth octave?
  7. "Please send private messages if you feel you need to attack each other" Chris, I didn't mean to attack anybody. I simply can't understand, how to decide which reproduction is better without base of comparison. "Less harsh, micro, macro..." Maybe it was made harsh intentionally? If some scene of the movie was shot in a fog, would you like the player, that removes that fog and makes the picture more clear? The movie director didn't have this in mind...
  8. "but I very seriously doubt that the noise is making wav sound better"... For the God's sake, Forrest, what do you mean "better"? Better to your taste? Or better to fit original, as must be? But who had compared to original?
  9. As I see it, any departure from the source file (even if some might perceive it as "better") is a "distortion". - fully agreed, even without quotes! So the question from me is, assuming a difference between .aif and .wav (one I have not heard on my system with my own recordings), is one "better" or is one in fact, worse? Comparisons against each other are useful for determining if one hears a difference. If a difference is established, I'd want to know which sounds like the original. - Barry, I see no interest in fidelity of reproduction here, except yours. All other posts are about "WAV sounds better to my taste" . P.S. For instance: "and the wavs always less strident and a bit more dynamic" - how do you know, how strident and how dynamic this recording was intended to be by sound producer?
  10. and you will see: "it is real and recorded " - mistake. It WAS real, when recorded. But when you listen - you have only fantom image. Sorry. "we still do not have a scientific explanation for how sound is reproduced with two speakers" - thesurfingalien explained you on Mon, 08/15/2011 - 01:55 : "it is based on phase-shifting between tweeter and woofer frequencies (or any loudspeaker in between depending on what #-way speaker one has)".
  11. "the sound actually raises up in an ark starting with the left speaker, slowing raising until it reaches about four feet above my speakers at center position and starts to descend as it goes over to the right speaker until it is as low as my speaker. This no illusion but very, very real which you can PROVE in your very own system!" Teresa, it's illusion exactly, by definition! There is no "sound" raising and lowering, it is called "phantom image". It exists in your mind only. And "soundstage" too, "air" and so on... It's better not to mix-up "soundstage" and "soundfield", which exists and can be measured. Soundfield (SPL values) at the listener's place makes listener's mind to form some soundstage, but soundstage doesn't exist without listener. It's not an object of real world. What you call "sound" may be produced even without any real sound source, simply with some electrodes in the brain . Sound is what we can pick with microphone and measure with voltmeter or oscilloscope. I understand, it's not as romantic as "flying sound", but is's boring truth...
  12. "However, I do always pick 93 octane for best performance, and my wallet is not happy." My car's recommended octane is 98, but it accepts 92 with no difference in performance. My sound system behaves identically
  13. "No one has yet discovered how to measure soundstage, image width, image height, air between instruments, ambiance, smoothness or roughness of string tone or timbre accuracy, just to name a few unmeasurable parameters of sound" We cannot measure all this because these are not objects of real world, but exist only in our minds. The last measurable parameters in playing sound chain are air pressure at the listener's place and vibration of his chair
  14. "in fact, I'd love to have a system so resolving that the differences become greater" Ted, if you unadjust your car's engine's ignition, the engine will become so resolving that you will feel the differences between gas from various gas-filling stations. But it's not a normal engine behaviour, right? Also there are so resolving people to feel the weather change - they have headache, high blood pressure and so on... Do you want to be one of them? Or you will consider it to be illness and try to heal it?
  15. ""That's easy, and it didn't even take a full moment of reflection. A correctly designed and implemented system should not show a difference in sound where none should exist (i.e. was not intended)." Why don't you just define it as "it should not show a difference between AIFF and WAV", then you'd have the perfect definition!! ?? Really now??" Well, I suppose another definition: "A correctly designed and implemented system should not show unpredictable results". A difference in sound where none should exist is only a particular case... Colleagues, let's use more science and less voodoo. "Some of us hear the difference"... And some of people see UFO . And answering Forrest's simple question: I do not hear the difference, playing music in different losless file formats. However I hear the difference between tube and solid state gear, different bitrates, different issues of the same album, and many other cases. But not Wav and Aiff, sorry. Maybe, it's because my comp isn't mini, but quite maxi? 17"x17"x7" BTW, had anyone "hearing difference" made double blind test with several listeners, following the rules? Or it's more boring than simply claim "I do hear! And my pal too!" Before this I, personally, can only BELEIVE anyone that HE hears the difference, but cannot KNOW that it exists.
×
×
  • Create New...