Jump to content
Computer Audiophile

gmgraves

  • Content count

    6,509
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gmgraves

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    It's gotta be something like that. I've always heard that one should avoid double conversions from one format to another, if possible.
  2. gmgraves

    UHQCD

    I have a couple of XRCDs from a small record company in England and they say on the covers that they were mastered and manufactured in Japan by JVC. Understand, these are not JVC labeled Discs, they are labeled by the company that released them, JVC is just the production house that this company (don't remember the label's name) used. But the do have XRCD emblazoned on the covers
  3. gmgraves

    UHQCD

    I dunno. How can a consumer know? I know that JVC takes great pains on both sides of production: the mastering and the manufacturing. In all of my XRCDs there's a flowchart showing what is supposedly JVCs process from the master tape to the final product, and it is quite involved. I certainly enjoy their sound, that's for sure.
  4. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    It's very difficult for the average music lover or audiophile to pin down exactly what the practical virtues are of high-res audio. The reason is because the results of the various formats is all over the place! There are red book CDs that sound better than either hi-res LPCM or DSD, There are DSDs that sound head and shoulders above the Red Book release of the same material (often on the same disc) and just the opposite is sometimes true. With the quality of all the formats so variable, all we can know for sure is what the formats are supposed to sound like, and the reason for those sonic characteristics.
  5. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    Of course I know the word pedantic, I consider myself an educated man. I brought up the pedanticism because my point was that it's extremely difficult to edit in the DSD format, I didn't think that the point needed expanding. But you are right, I didn't know that some record companies convert their DSD to tape to edit it and I thank you (for what it's worth) for the information. My reaction to that is why bother? Why not capture the performance on analog tape, edit it with a razor blade, and then transfer the edited tape to DSD? That certainly makes more sense than doing a double conversion. Of course DSD recorders are a lot smaller than a pro analog tape deck, and that might be a legitimate reason for capturing a performance in DSD. I don't think it's anything I'd ever do, but then, I record live performances and don't do much in the way of editing, so that point is moot with me.:)
  6. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    It still seems that AAC is better. The BBC3 stream is very nice to listen to on speakers and headphones!
  7. gmgraves

    UHQCD

    I've never had a UHQCD, but I can't imagine that it's much different from what JVC does with their XRCDs. I have a lot of the latter, and they are definitely a cut above. In a number oc cases I have regular CDs of these titles and in some cases I have SACDs of these titles, the JVC XRCD always sounds better
  8. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    Good luck with that, Frank! I'm glad somebody doesn't have a problem with it, but that somebody isn't me! I find anything lower than 128 kbps to be unlistenable! The combination of pre-echo and ringing coupled with the noise modulation makes for a very unsatisfactory listening experience. at 192 kbps, I find listening on speakers to be acceptable but it requires a bit rate of 320 kbps to be acceptable to me on headphones. BBC3 is using AAC nowadays to stream classical music and I have to say, I have heard no artifacts on either speakers or headphones yet.
  9. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    Believe me, I'm well acquainted aware with that particular shortcoming of the format.
  10. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    Pedanticism, thy name is Firedog! The point was that DSD cannot be edited as DSD, It has to be edited in another format. There is nothing that says that the DSD file couldn't be converted to 33.3 RPM stereo lacquer transcriptions to be A/B roll edited (like video tape) to a third 33.3 RPM stereo lacquer transcription, before being converted back to DSD. But I'm reasonably sure that a similar number of record companies do that as transfer their DSD recordings to analog tape to edit them.
  11. gmgraves

    16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

    You are aware that all DSD recordings have to be converted to LPCM to edit them, after which they are converted back to DSD?
  12. gmgraves

    Mark Waldrep In Trouble Again?

    You're not telling me anything that I don't already know and have said here many times myself. But the companies that make them sell them as cables, don't they?
  13. gmgraves

    Mark Waldrep In Trouble Again?

    Who doesn't? My three favorite cartoon characters are Bugs, Donald Duck, and Goofy. And I might as well enlarge that trinity to encompass Daffy Duck as well!
  14. gmgraves

    Mark Waldrep In Trouble Again?

    If I lived in SoCal, I'd certainly be a member of LAOCAS. Here in the Reno area, I know exactly two other audiophiles and the nearest audio society is in Sacramento CA, more than three hours away over the Sierra Nevada mountains!
  15. gmgraves

    Mark Waldrep In Trouble Again?

    It's more like I'm against preposterous horses and wives that hang out under bridges. But c'mon that horse Bugs Bunny (in drag, again) is riding is simply priceless!
×