Jump to content
Computer Audiophile

peter73

  • Content count

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About peter73

  • Rank
    Freshman Member
  1. Does anyone have problems uploading songs to GPM? It started yesterday for me - all files that are not recognised by GPM and need to be actually uploaded (instead of just referenced with their own files) fail with "file upload error". Tried everything, including uploading from a different PC and to a different account - still no success.
  2. If we are still talking about Whitney Houston in this Sade thread, there will never be worthwhile HD remasters as all her albums are actually recorded digitally.
  3. ... and they clearly care about audiophiles enough to produce a fake HD that has a sharp cut at 21 kHz and absolutely nothing but some noise above.
  4. I was just listening to Nathan East's new album on CD - NE is a top musician and so are most of the others on the album. He is also part of Fourplay that has been played to death on HiFi Shows. The album is mastered by Bernie Grundman and sounds great. There is nothing on this album that suggests it is aimed at the mp3/earbuds crowd, it is produced by top professionals and I am pretty sure it sounds exactly as they want it to. It is also issued on Yamaha's own label - hardly a tyrannic major or a label that doesn't care about sound quality. Some tracks have a DR of 5. And the music is crap, BTW.
  5. Not that much, apparently, as otherwise you could have spent 3 seconds searching and finding this Search results for 'whitney' | HDtracks - The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads
  6. I really don't know about Bowie's last album and whether he was physically able to supervise everything but I have not even the slightest doubt that Sting's album sounds exactly like he wanted it to - to the last bit. I think it's wrong to expect the musicians to have the same approach to sound as audiophiles. To audiophiles the best sound is generally the one that is most natural, while to musicians sounds is a tool that conveys certain emotion and triggers certain response. That is the reason why audiophile recordings exist where the sound comes first and the sound engineer is the star while the performance itself is often quite mediocre.
  7. And yet it actually sounds pretty decent. Compression is an artistic decision - it's like guitar distortion or over-saturated or highly stylised colours in a lot of movies - you either like it or not but if it serves an artistic purpose and is used appropriately it can not be inherently good or bad. I would definitely not dismiss an album based on dynamic range numbers as long as it is not unlistenable and this one is definitely not.
  8. I have been a devoted fan since my teenage years when Diamond Life came out and I had it on cassette :-)) Anyway, all subsequent CD remasters of Sade's albums are worse than the previous ones. The recent (in Sade's terms} Ultimate Collection has the worse remastering of them all and is plain unlistenable. Some of the tracks in this Collection use different (inferior) sources than the official releases, which makes me believe that they either have lost the original master tapes or have some sort of legal issues that prevent them from using them. Whatever the reason, I am not holding my breath for any new remasters. We should consider ourselves lucky that the initial releases are actually quite good and simply enjoy the music.
  9. RCA Interconnect Comparison

    But the Ref. Point is AFTER the cable, connecting the source to the Amp. Well, just because you say it doesn't make it true either. With all your claimed experience and my presumed inexperience, and you still just don't get it, do you? May I try with a simpler example - if I want to know how the global temperature changed between 2005 (ref. point) and 2010 (test. point) I don't really have to go back to the Big Bang and compare the temperature then to the temperature now in 2016, do I? No, its you who claims no one does it this way - can you prove that, please. "As far as I know" is not a proof - it might very well mean that as far as you know is just not very far.
  10. 24bit Radiohead/In Rainbows

    I know the header reads 24 bit. That is why I said "actual" audio data bit depth, not 16 bits of audio data plus 8 bits of zeroes to justify the higher price, as we have seen quite often previously :-)
  11. 24bit Radiohead/In Rainbows

    I did - sounds absolutely identical. My guess is it's sourced from the CD master files. If anyone has the software to compare actual bit-depth, I bet it is 16-bit.
  12. RCA Interconnect Comparison

    There's only one cable between the Reference Point and the Test Point - take a look at the picture again, mate.
  13. RCA Interconnect Comparison

    For the sake of clarity (and because I ran out of page :-) I have only included one tape loop but my amp has two and I have compared two cables in parallel. However one tape loop is sufficient for testing a single cable for relative transparency (relative because it only applies to your system and your ears). A transparent cable is one with which there is no discernible difference in sound when switching between the Ref, Point (Amp IN 1) and the Test Point (Amp IN 2). The cable that came closest to being transparent on my test was the generic red/white cable. The other cables I tested were clearly altering the sound for the most part by high frequency roll-off and one of them (Nordost) was clearly not properly shielded, which introduces high frequency noise that subjectively sounded like more pronounced treble.
  14. RCA Interconnect Comparison

    This is why I am saying that you do not understand the test setup - I am not running 2 different cables in series. Between the reference point (Amp IN "Source") and the test point (Amp IN "Cable 1" and Amp IN "Cable 2") the cables on test are running in parallel. Anything before the reference point, including the cable connecting the source to the amp, is irrelevant.You're not the first person to come up with this idea for comparison. And yet, somehow 50 posts later you are still not getting it right.
  15. RCA Interconnect Comparison

    I don't want to push this thread off-topic, but even Benchmark themselves state that in most cases DAC1 sounds almost indistinguishable from their own new DAC2 that was rated A+ by Stereophile in 2016. And once again (and for the last time) - you might want to go through my first post again and think about it a bit and then you might realise that the source is not the critical element in this test setup.
×