Dedicated CD player vs. DVD player

[kay]

Hello all!

What do you guys think of the old mantra of Hi-Fi that dedicated CD players sound better? If one's using a DVD player as a transport, and using a receiver's internal DAC's, how bad would it be in comparison with:

a) a CD player via a digital connection (i.e. only used as a transport)
b) a nice-ish CD player via analogue interconnects

Would love to hear some opinions from the regular audioholics :)

[Sleestack]

I own high end CD players (Meridian G08, Classe Omega SACD2), excellent DVD players (Denon 3910 and 5910) and a pretty well regarded prepro/amp setups (Parasound C1 and A51).

My opinion is that if you use the digital outs, there isn't any audible difference between using an expensive and a cheap transport. Your DVD player should be fine. Others disagree, but I haven't been able to hear a difference running various sources through the same DAC.

In my opinion, a dedicated CD player is the way to go if you are willing to spend a substantial amount of money. Using the analog output on my Meridian sounds better than using the DAD in my Denons or my Parasound. On the other hand, if you are looking at CD players in the $500 range, you are probably not going to get a substanital improvement over your DVD player or receiver.

[kay]

Thanks for the honest and to-the-point answer!

[Dinkar Rai]

I own high end CD players (Meridian G08, Classe Omega SACD2), excellent DVD players (Denon 3910 and 5910) and a pretty well regarded prepro/amp setups (Parasound C1 and A51).

My opinion is that if you use the digital outs, there isn't any audible difference between using an expensive and a cheap transport. Your DVD player should be fine. Others disagree, but I haven't been able to hear a difference running various sources through the same DAC.

In my opinion, a dedicated CD player is the way to go if you are willing to spend a substantial amount of money. Using the analog output on my Meridian sounds better than using the DAD in my Denons or my Parasound. On the other hand, if you are looking at CD players in the $500 range, you are probably not going to get a substanital improvement over your DVD player or receiver.

you mentioned about using the digital outs. what about using the co-axial outs. will it make any difference?

[jaxvon]

Coaxial is just another form of digital. So the same thing as optical, just a different method of transferring the 1s and 0s.

[j_garcia]

It depends. Analog - If you have a $100 DVD player, a decent, say $500, CD player is definitely going to sound much better, while a $100 CD player is not. If you have a $1K DVD player, you probably aren't going to find too many CD players that are going to be much better (in general, depends on the player).

As Sleestack points out, with digital to a reciever's DACs, the receiver is going to determine how it sounds overall, so it isn't going to make much difference.

[WmAx]

It depends. Analog - If you have a $100 DVD player, a decent, say $500, CD player is definitely going to sound much better, while a $100 CD player is not. If you have a $1K DVD player, you probably aren't going to find too many CD players that are going to be much better (in general, depends on the player).


Please explain what, between a $100 player vs. the $500[no, go ahead and make that $15,000] player is going to differentiate the sound in an audible manner[in a bias controlled double-blinded test], if both devices were designed to have a flat frequency response and low distortion[I specify these things because some hi-end player designs have purposely modified one or the other to get audible effects]?

-Chris

[kay]

Well I'm definitely looking for something under $500, more like under $300.

Tossing around ideas of getting a Pioneer DV-575A, Denon DVD-1910, Cambridge Audio 540D - that sort of thing - and wondering whether I shouldn't get a dedicated CD player in the mean time and wait for a HD DVD player sometime next year. (I'm a big optimist...)

Wonder how my Denon AVR-2105's DAC's are going to sound compared to a reasonable CD player's analogue output? :)

For the record, the Denon receiver feeds a pair of B&W DM603 S3's.

[jaxvon]

Perhaps a difference in S/N ratio. But then again, I don't think the difference between a 90dB S/N on the cheapie and the 115dB S/N will be audible.

[kay]

Please explain what, between a $100 player vs. the $500[no, go ahead and make that $15,000] player is going to differentiate the sound in an audible manner[in a bias controlled double-blinded test], if both devices were designed to have a flat frequency response and low distortion[I specify these things because some hi-end player designs have purposely modified one or the other to get audible effects]?

-Chris

Main difference to me is the DAC stage. As far as transport goes, perhaps you can get a less noisy one, but I'm sure if you're spending $100 (as opposed to $20), you're already getting a good enough transport.

Now the DAC stage is where things can get really fancy. Jitter has been proven to be a major factor in SQ so a decent player would include expensive buffers and re-clocking before it feeds the DAC's. Then there's the issue of the actual DAC chips - algorithms, oversampling.

Add to all that the chassis, proximity of signal paths, clean and sufficient power - it all adds up. So yes, I believe you will hear a difference between $100 and $1,000 machines, but probably not between $1,000 and $15,000.

[Sleestack]

Main difference to me is the DAC stage. As far as transport goes, perhaps you can get a less noisy one, but I'm sure if you're spending $100 (as opposed to $20), you're already getting a good enough transport.

Now the DAC stage is where things can get really fancy. Jitter has been proven to be a major factor in SQ so a decent player would include expensive buffers and re-clocking before it feeds the DAC's. Then there's the issue of the actual DAC chips - algorithms, oversampling.

Add to all that the chassis, proximity of signal paths, clean and sufficient power - it all adds up. So yes, I believe you will hear a difference between $100 and $1,000 machines, but probably not between $1,000 and $15,000.


Actually I have several $1000 players ,a few players in the $5K range and one close to $10K. There is definitely a difference in their various analog output stages. Whether or not you might find that difference significant is really a matter of opinion. As much as you should be wary of snake oil peddlers here, be wary of those who speak based on what they read rather than real experiences.

I don't think high end CD players are the wisest choice for most people or those who are cost conscious, but IMO, even a great universal like the 5910 I own, does not compare to the Meridian G08 or Classe Omega SACD. Its Redbook playback is ver good, but not exceptional.

[kay]

Ok, make that between $10,000 and $100,000 ;)

EDIT: The other question is, of course, at which point does my average mid-fi receiver become the limiting factor. I suspect a lot sooner than with whatever amplification you're using.

[MDS]

Now the DAC stage is where things can get really fancy. Jitter has been proven to be a major factor in SQ so a decent player would include expensive buffers and re-clocking before it feeds the DAC's. Then there's the issue of the actual DAC chips - algorithms, oversampling.

Proven by whom? ALL players buffer and re-clock the data. 'Jitter' is the boogeyman of digital audio and lots of people point to it as the main reason for differences in sound between players. The simple fact is that jitter is inherent in any digital audio system and can never be totally eliminated, but the levels of jitter in modern electronics is so vanishingly low that it is all but irrelevant.

[Sleestack]

Proven by whom? ALL players buffer and re-clock the data. 'Jitter' is the boogeyman of digital audio and lots of people point to it as the main reason for differences in sound between players. The simple fact is that jitter is inherent in any digital audio system and can never be totally eliminated, but the levels of jitter in modern electronics is so vanishingly low that it is all but irrelevant.


I'm not so sure about jitter either.... which is why I think I can't hear a difference between various sources being run through the same DAC. I think the primary sonic differences are in the prgramming of the DAC and the components used in the analog output stage.

[WmAx]

Now the DAC stage is where things can get really fancy. Jitter has been proven to be a major factor in SQ so a decent player would include expensive buffers and re-clocking before it feeds the DAC's. Then there's the issue of the actual DAC chips - algorithms, oversampling.

Add to all that the chassis, proximity of signal paths, clean and sufficient power - it all adds up. So yes, I believe you will hear a difference between $100 and $1,000 machines, but probably not between $1,000 and $15,000.

Please refer to the conditions of the listening tests under which these observations are typically made. They are sighted, and thus, are highly biased. About as credible as loudspeaker cable reviews.

Jitter: I suggest you actually look for credible research actually proving thst it is a major factor at the levels of jitter involved in a typical DAC. I'm aware of alot of audiophile opinions on the matter, but not ones backed by respectable perceptual data. Even a typical consumer player has [1]lower jitter than is known to be audible in any perceptual test that even begins to resemble something with careful testing methodology, as opposed to the standard sighted[worthless] evaluations used to make points in the audiophile world. So far as other things, such as oversampling, that is a method to ensure a more precise anti-alias filter, and as has been a standard on virtually all equipment since the mid 80's. So far as proximity of signal paths to power lines, etc.; that equates to the noisefloor. If you have an audible noisefloor---well---that's obvious. Sufficient power: The device would not operate or would have serious operating errors if it was not fed sufficient power.

-Chris

[1]Theoretical and Audible Effects of Jitter on Digital Audio Quality
Benjamin, Eric; Gannon, Benjamin [Dolby Labs]
AES Preprint: 4826

[j_garcia]

Please explain what, between a $100 player vs. the $500[no, go ahead and make that $15,000] player is going to differentiate the sound in an audible manner[in a bias controlled double-blinded test], if both devices were designed to have a flat frequency response and low distortion[I specify these things because some hi-end player designs have purposely modified one or the other to get audible effects]?

Yep. The difference between the $5 DACs in that $100 DVD player and say decent Burr-Brown DACs in something like the Denon 2900 or 3910, will make a VERY noticable difference when played in analog from the player. DACs easily account for differences in sound, I don't see how one could question that, since you should have no problem hearing it in a DBT. It's a well known fact, not some mysterious audio fluff. Which sounds better to a given person is an entrely different matter, since everyone percieves sound in their own way.

What I don't see is why people insist on arguing what one person hears and another does not, whether it is measureable or not.

If there is no difference in equipment, then I suppose that means your personal system costs $500 total, because there is no difference between it and a $100,000 system (with the exception of power)?

[WmAx]

Ok, make that between $10,000 and $100,000 ;)

EDIT: The other question is, of course, at which point does my average mid-fi receiver become the limiting factor. I suspect a lot sooner than with whatever amplification you're using.

Your mid-fi reciever becomes the limiting factor when any of the following conditions are present:

(1) It does not operate correctly or in some way has insufficient behaviour with the speakers that are driven[insufficient ouput power, unusual impedance load, etc.].

(2) It does not have sufficient features/options for the application.

(3) You want something that is nicer, in a cosmetic/asthetic sense, that helps fulfill a mental satisfaction.

-Chris

[WmAx]

Yep. The difference between the $5 DACs in that $100 DVD player and say decent Burr-Brown DACs in something like the Denon 2900 or 3910, will make a VERY noticable difference when played in analog from the player. DACs easily account for differences in sound, I don't see how one could question that, since you should have no problem hearing it in a DBT. It's a well known fact, not some mysterious audio fluff. Which sounds better to a given person is an entrely different matter, since everyone percieves sound in their own way.

Since a low cost, properly designed DAC can have measurable characteristics that are well under known human JNDs, what is left besides mysterious audio fluff?

-Chris

[j_garcia]

Since a low cost, properly designed DAC can have measurable characteristics that are well under known human JNDs, what is left besides mysterious audio fluff?


So, there's NO difference AT ALL between a $1K player and a $100 player? The DAC and it's implementation, every electronic component in the singal path, has an influence on the sound. I suppose there's no difference in video DACs either?

What else is there no difference in? Beef? Tires? Religion? Air?

[Sleestack]

So, there's NO difference AT ALL between a $1K player and a $100 player? The DAC and it's implementation, every electronic component in the singal path, has an influence on the sound. I suppose there's no difference in video DACs either?

What else is there no difference in? Beef? Tires? Religion? Air?

I hear you. The position some people take on this board is just as bad as the snake oil vendors. But, some poeple need to find away to justify their own inability or reluctance to spend money on excellent equipment that happens to be expensive.

[j_garcia]

I wouldn't go so far as to call it an inability, however I would definitely call it a reluctance, or rather a bit of a prejudice even.

The ability to believe is just as strong as the ability to disbelieve. Those who say that someone hears a difference because they "want" to, or because they are influenced by looks or cost, well, there's merrit to that, but what about the fact that this also applies in the opposite case. If one goes into a test, including a DBT, already believing that there will be no difference, then is it not reasonable to say they will not hear a difference by the same token?

Nobody's convinced me yet that I don't know what I'm hearing with my own two ears.

What shall we debate next? Politics? :D

[WmAx]

So, there's NO difference AT ALL between a $1K player and a $100 player? The DAC and it's implementation, every electronic component in the singal path, has an influence on the sound. I suppose there's no difference in video DACs either?

Please explain the specific feature, it's properties, and it's effect on actual sound[referenced with a credible perceptual study], that can only be achieved with an 'expensive' player vs. a 'cheap' player. So far as video DACs, afraid that I don't keep up on video technology, so I can't really answer that one way or another. The "every electronic component in the signal path, has an influence on the sound" argument is without merit unless the effect is within human detectable differences in real application(s). Please refer to the first sentence of this reply.

-Chris

[WmAx]

I hear you. The position some people take on this board is just as bad as the snake oil vendors. But, some poeple need to find away to justify their own inability or reluctance to spend money on excellent equipment that happens to be expensive.

If you are referring to me, your supposition is without merit. How horrible, that I[or anyone else] would require proof/validation of claims that go beyond the standard audiophile requirements of proof[that are very low, and usually amount to nothing more than "because I used my ears"].

-Chris

[j_garcia]

I don't think that was directed at any one person. Shall we ask for a scientific study to be done to verify that it was or wasn't? :p

It's your money. If you don't hear a difference, don't buy it. Radio Shack will be happy to have you as a customer, since all their gear is equally as good as everything else out there.

[WmAx]

I don't think that was directed at any one person. Shall we ask for a scientific study to be done to verify that it was or wasn't? :p


The first few words of post no. 23 made clear the condition of applicability of said post.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

If you are referring to me, your supposition is without merit. How horrible, that I[or anyone else] would require proof/validation of claims that go beyond the standard audiophile requirements of proof[that are very low, and usually amount to nothing more than "because I used my ears"].

-Chris


If you feel it was directed at you, I guess it applies.

Why does every thread need to be turned into a DBT geekfest and scientific study of every opinion on high end equipment? Someone posted a simple question and was answered based on personal experience.

You posted some random generalizations that didn't really add anything to the discussion.Then, you qualify it by saying... " I specify these things because some hi-end player designs have purposely modified one or the other to get audible effects." You treat as a dismissive qualification, the very reason one would choose to buy a high end player... b/c it has a distincitve sound that the listener likes. How many players have you listened to for more than 10 minutes? How many different players do you actually own. I gave specific examples based on equipment I own. Do you know anything about them or do you just assume my opinion is useless until I have subjected myself to a rigorous DBT.


Your agenda is getting obnoxious. Not everyone has the time to study audio. Some people just want to enjoy it. Unless you have specific comments on specific products, why turn every thread into a pulpit for linearity and affordable audio?

[mtrycrafts]

As much as you should be wary of snake oil peddlers here, be wary of those who speak based on what they read rather than real experiences..

What would that inlcude? Perhaps DBT protocol in listening comparisons to statistically significant results? Real level matched time alligned setups?
Or, just what audiophiles do, turn on and compare?
Which experience has merit to find real answers?

[WmAx]

Why does every thread need to be turned into a DBT geekfest and scientific study of every opinion on high end equipment?

[1]See the tag line under the Audioholics logo on the top left of the forum page? The line that says, "Pursuing the Truth in Audio & Video...". That's the reason.

Your agenda is getting obnoxious. Not everyone has the time to study audio. Some people just want to enjoy it. Unless you have specific comments on specific products, why turn every thread into a pulpit for linearity and affordable audio?

Refer to [1].

-Chris

[mtrycrafts]

What I don't see is why people insist on arguing what one person hears and another does not, whether it is measureable or not.


The point is, are they hearing something that is real, or an imagined perception that is imaginery? What validity does an imagined differences have? What good is it to anyone else?

[Sleestack]

[1]See the tag line under the Audioholics logo on the top left of the forum page? The line that says, "Pursuing the Truth in Audio & Video...". That's the reason.



Refer to [1].

-Chris


Pursuing truth is one thing, being uninformative, repetitve and not having anything relevant to say about particular products being discussed, is another. I have read plenty of reviews by the writers on the main site. While they provide useful tests and results, they don't talk about products solely in terms of test data. Furthermore, they aren't sitting around rigorously DBT every product they review. They review specific products and provide useful objective information and subjective impressions. They don't drone on about DBT... and certainly don't turn every article into a mundane lecture on "Pursuing the Truth in Audio and Video."

[WmAx]

Pursuing truth is one thing, being uninformative, repetitve and not having anything relevant to say about particular products being discussed, is another.

Me, un-informative? You might not like what I type, but to accuse me of being un-informative is absurd. My purpose[primary function] here is to guide/help people understand the real underlying issues for sound reproduction. If you wish to research my posting history, it will be seen that I, almost always, go out of my way in providing high quality, in-depth information. I have provided more useful data in this thread, in response to the original inquiry, as compared to anyone else, as of this point. So far as being repetative; that is true. But, I have to be, because the answer is often the same. The answer does not change. When the answer is called for, it will be repeated. Random claims[without substantial basis] based on speculations of what someone thinks they hear drags this site down to the level of sites such as Audio Asylum. Also, even though some products do have purposefully induced non-linear performance of sufficient magnitude to be audible, this is not a typical practice, even for hi-end equipment. You make it sound as if the percieved differences in sound are nearly always a result of real physical differences. But this is not the case, as is supported by the multitude of 3rd party, in-depth measurements available on many modern electronics. You can see for yourself: Stereophile is an excellent source of 3rd party in-depth measurements, if not an excellent source of anything else. It is rare that hi-end products demonstrate signficant deviations. Those that do are usually oddball devices such as SET tube amplifiers or unfiltered aliasing DACs, for example. So what is left to explain the audible differences touted by nearly every reviewer/audiophile concerning nearly every piece[as opposed to just the unusual examples] of equipment, besides a vivid imagination?

I have read plenty of reviews by the writers on the main site. While they provide useful tests and results, they don't talk about products solely in terms of test data. Furthermore, they aren't sitting around rigorously DBT every product they review.

Nothing is perfect, including Audioholics reviews. Perhaps I take their tag line more seriously than they do? I only pointed to the text so that it is known what guides my actions here.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

Me, un-informative? You might not like what I type, but to accuse me of being un-informative is absurd. My purpose[primary function] here is to guide/help people understand the real underlying issues for sound reproduction. If you wish to research my posting history, it will be seen that I, almost always, go out of my way in providing high quality, in-depth information. I have provided more useful data in this thread, in response to the original inquiry, as compared to anyone else, as of this point. So far as being repetative; that is true. But, I have to be, because the answer is often the same. The answer does not change. When the answer is called for, it will be repeated. Random claims[without substantial basis] based on speculations of what someone thinks they hear drags this site down to the level of sites such as Audio Asylum. Also, even though some products do have purposefully induced non-linear performance of sufficient magnitude to be audible, this is not a typical practice, even for hi-end equipment. You make it sound as if the percieved differences in sound are nearly always a result of real physical differences. But this is not the case, as is supported by the multitude of 3rd party, in-depth measurements available on many modern electronics. You can see for yourself: Stereophile is an excellent source of 3rd party in-depth measurements, if not an excellent source of anything else. It is rare that hi-end products demonstrate signficant deviations. So what is left to explain the audible differences touted by nearly every reviewer/audiophile of such equipment, besides a vivid imagination?





-Chris

I have read plenty of your posts. How exactly do you think you were being informative in this thread? Obviously you think of your opinions quite highly, but don't assume everyone else does. Your self righteousness is what is absurd. Do you know anything about the specific products that were mentioned or do you just like interjecting your mantra in every post? Do you really think you are doing anyone a favor by being mindnumbingly boring instead of having useful information or impressions?

You have a mission... great. Perhaps you can spare us your indignation for a moment and allow the rest of us to talk about equipment in away that is not up to your standards. On the other hand, please enlighten us and tell us something useful about the products I have discussed.

[WmAx]

I have read plenty of your posts. How exactly do you think you were being informative in this thread? Refer to [a].

Obviously you think of your opinions quite highly, but don't assume everyone else does. Your self righteousness is what is absurd.

Well, that's only because I have investigated these issues in depth, where as you[and most others] have not. How can I think highly of opinions that seem to be based on nothing more than speculation?

Do you know anything about the specific products that were mentioned or do you just like interjecting your mantra in every post?

[a] You should go back to page 1 and read from the beginning. Why? Because you have apparently forgotten what exactly it is that I responded to. In that perspective, your accusations/questions don't make sense.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

Refer to [a].



Well, that's only because I have investigated these issues in depth, where as you[and most others] have not. How can I think highly of opinions that seem to be based on nothing more than speculation?



[a] You should go back to page 1 and read from the beginning. Why? Because you have apparently forgotten what exactly it is that I responded to. In that perspective, your accusations/questions don't make sense.

-Chris

I see your original post, however I also see your diversion into the realm of "there's no difference between cheap players and expensive players," ...of course with your caveat to fall back on. Given that I had talked about the difference between various players a few posts prior, I think it is natural to assume that your statements were meant to be applicable to my post as well. Furthermore, you certainly haven't stated otherwise up to this point. Of course, I can't seem to get you to talk about any specific product, so perhaps we all just need to hit the books so we can reach your level of aural enlightenment.

You know what... you're right. Despite the fact that I have many wonderful pieces of equipment that I'm sure people would be interested to hear about, since mere impressions are useless, I'll refrain from posting until I do DBTs in a sensory depravation chamber.

[sploo]

Hey everyone, just chill for a moment and stop trying to kill the other guy.

Let's look at this logically:

Chris - you've posted many links in many threads to studies showing that the levels of artifacts such as jitter and distortion in modern players are well below audible human thresholds. OK, this is pretty convincing and hard to argue against.

j_garcia, Sleestack - I agree. I'm absolutely certain I've heard major differences in the sound that comes from different players. Whilst the tests haven't been blind I have performed a few tests where I didn't know the supposed relative qualities of players, so I at least had a minimum of expectation.

So, what are we left with?

Well, if you listen to two players, and prefer one, and it's within your budget then buy it and enjoy it.

If you're interested in the science, and/or don't want to spend more money than necessary, then look at the numbers.

A DBT really isn't that practical for most, so how can we quantitively show differences between players? I was thinking of making a CDR with a 20-20k sweep, and measuring the frequency response and distortion from various CD and DVD player's analog output stages.

The crux here is:

1. Can we settle on some reference sound file - e.g. a 20-20k sweep at some dB level over x seconds?
2. Chris, mtrycrafts would you agree that this is a valid measurement?
3. Sleestack, you have multiple players, would you agree to perform some tests? I guess you'd just need a PC and a copy of the RightMark Audio Analyzer (http://rightmark.org).

Alternatively, I'll supply you guys with big sticks, and you can hit one another repeatedly for our entertainment. Just make sure you video it :D.

[j_garcia]

Pursuing truth is one thing, being uninformative, repetitve and not having anything relevant to say about particular products being discussed, is another. I have read plenty of reviews by the writers on the main site. While they provide useful tests and results, they don't talk about products solely in terms of test data. Furthermore, they aren't sitting around rigorously DBT every product they review. They review specific products and provide useful objective information and subjective impressions. They don't drone on about DBT... and certainly don't turn every article into a mundane lecture on "Pursuing the Truth in Audio and Video."

Well said.

Alternatively, I'll supply you guys with big sticks, and you can hit one another repeatedly for our entertainment. Just make sure you video it :D

:D

[Sleestack]

3. Sleestack, you have multiple players, would you agree to perform some tests? I guess you'd just need a PC and a copy of the RightMark Audio Analyzer (http://rightmark.org).

.

Can't promise that it will happen right away, but I would certainly be willing to do it with a little guidance. As I stated previously, I do not detect audible differences when using digital outs and running them through a common DAC, but the analog outputs (which are the ones I care about for Redbook) are a different story.

[j_garcia]

since mere impressions are useless, I'll refrain from posting until I do DBTs in a sensory depravation chamber.

Actually, we need to organize a group of people who were blind at birth, do a hearing assessment of them, then select from that group the 10 people who have the best range of hearing, and use them to do the listening. Music cannot be used, because music doesn't matter, only numbers, so only sweeps and pink noise will be used to conduct the testing.

The point is, are they hearing something that is real, or an imagined perception that is imaginery? What validity does an imagined differences have? What good is it to anyone else?

Hello, people don't all hear the same. What comes into your ear is the actual sound, that may be slightly modified by the particular person's overall hearing ability. Some people have a sensitivity to certain frequencies, while others may be unable to hear specific frequencies well. On top of that, what your brain processes of that signal is a perception, which means ALL HEARING is a perception, influenced by an individual's predisposition for listening for certain characteristics.

[miklorsmith]

Sleestack has stuff that's nicer than mine. I welcome any experience he would like to share. The scientists are free to ignore it.

[j_garcia]

I can't seem to get you to talk about any specific product, so perhaps we all just need to hit the books so we can reach your level of aural enlightenment.

Let me add to that, along with something else Sleestack saidL: If you haven't actually listened to a variety of players in said configurations and conditions, or actually been a part of one of these DBTs, then all the data in the world doesn't validate your position to me. Does anyone besides Sleestack in this thread have the ability to compare a variety of units of different price categories?

[miklorsmith]

So, if I'm out for biggest bang-for-the buck sound, and fit'n'finish aren't important for my redbook performance, am I best off with a solid but relatively inexpensive transport mated to a quality DAC? Any experience with non-oversampling DAC's. I've heard they are generally less microscopic in detail but provide a more "analog", natural sound.

[sploo]

Hello, people don't all hear the same. What comes into your ear is the actual sound, that may be slightly modified by the particular person's overall hearing ability. Some people have a sensitivity to certain frequencies, while others may be unable to hear specific frequencies well. On top of that, what your brain processes of that signal is a perception, which means ALL HEARING is a perception, influenced by an individual's predisposition for listening for certain characteristics.

I think the point mtrycrafts was making (and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong ;)) was about our perceptions between two pieces of kit being coloured because we know we're hearing different pieces of kit.

I have absolutely no doubt that what exactly we hear (perceive) is different from person to person, so I suppose it's valid that different people would perceive different sounding players in different ways. However, given two players which should sound the same (by the mtrycrafts/WmAx argument) nobody (regardless of 'how' they hear) should be able to tell the difference in a DBT. Of course, different people may have differing perceptions based on how shiny the buttons are on the front panel, but we're all human.

[sts9fan]

"Please explain what, between a $100 player vs. the $500[no, go ahead and make that $15,000] player is going to differentiate the sound in an audible manner"

How about mass? Quality of build and components? You do you believe that the componets in a $100 player and a $1000 player are the same? Also I would never assume that a product is better due to price without doing research and listening. Also what about reliability? Is the motor in the $100 as good? Is the board manufactured as carefully?

What do you use as a cd player just for reference? I just finished modding my Toshiba 4060 and yes I can hear the difference.

[sploo]

Can't promise that it will happen right away, but I would certainly be willing to do it with a little guidance. As I stated previously, I do not detect audible differences when using digital outs and running them through a common DAC, but the analog outputs (which are the ones I care about for Redbook) are a different story.

This idea was sparked off, for me anyway, when I listened to a decent (roughly 1300USD) Denon DVD player vs. a (roughly 1000USD) Cyrus CD player.

The Cyrus was stunning, the Denon was OK (all through analogue obviously).

I'm currently running a borrowed Denon 3910 DVD player (a higher model than the one I heard), and I can't separate it playing CDs from a 200USD Sony Discman.

So why did I think the Cyrus sounded better? Hopefully a frequency response/distortion measurement would be enlightening.

[Buckle-meister]

What I don't see is why people insist on arguing what one person hears and another does not, whether it is measureable or not.

Absolutely. The problem here is of mutual respect, or rather, a lack of it.

Mtrycrafts, when you write:
They want to so desperately believe...
and
...Or, just what audiophiles do, turn on and compare?
...it doesn't come across as simply being in disagreement with them, but of holding these people in contempt.
The point is, are they hearing something that is real, or an imagined perception that is imaginery? What validity does an imagined difference have? What good is it to anyone else?
But it is of use to others. Doesn't anbodys opinion (on anything) matter to you? Regardless of whether it is factually right or wrong?
I suggest you actually look for...
It's not what you are saying, but the way in which you are saying it. Again, it comes across as contempt for others.
How horrible, that I[or anyone else] would require proof/validation of claims that go beyond the standard audiophile requirements of proof[that are very low, and usually amount to nothing more than "because I used my ears"].
But you do. You commonly ask that people justify their observations with raw data. Yet their observations are just that; observations. They might not carry any weight in your eyes, but for others, they do.

Why does every thread need to be turned into a DBT geekfest...

Mtrycrafts, WmAx, it really does seem like that sometimes. I know both of you are only trying to help. I myself have been a beneficiary of it many times for which I am very gratefull.
...it will be seen that I, almost always, go out of my way in providing high quality, in-depth information.
I can vouch for that. You have helped me out many times in the past, and I would not have it any different.
How can I think highly of opinions that seem to be based on nothing more than speculation?
Trust them! It doesn't matter whether they only thought they heard something that wasn't there at all. For them, it did exist. It was part of their reality. I'd bet any money that even though these same people may disagree with passages of text you have written, they don't think any less of you.

Why can't you return the favour?

Unless I am very much mistaken, these people would have no problem with you respectfully disagreeing with their opinions. But when you write what you have, in the way that you have, it comes across as tantamount to calling them liars. That's a big difference. Can you really blame them for getting irate?

I'm absolutely certain I've heard major differences in the sound that comes from different players.

As have I. I bought a Yamaha S2500 universal player recently. I use the same coaxial cable from the player to the DSP-Z9 that I did from my previous Musical Fidelity CD player. In each case, I know I am using the player only as a transport. I know that I should't hear a difference. But I simply cannot escape the fact that I can. :)

Dubya says: "I have a record in office, as well. And all Americans have seen that record. September the 4th, 2001, I stood in the ruins of the Twin Towers. It's a day I will never forget."
-- And again he has trouble with the space-time continuum, Marlton, New Jersey, Oct. 18, 2004

Now that's funny. :) (even though it's quite appalling at the same time).

Regards (to all); Lets all agree to respectfully disagree.

[sts9fan]

I have not heard my player but when I got my 4060 in the mail I wanted to compare it to my Yammy universal player. All I can say is that even my girlfriend who hates all the stereo equiptment and definitly had no clue which was THOUGHT to be better said the $350 Yammie had tons better bass. Was she hearing things or did she have preconcived notions? :confused:

[Rob Babcock]

I'm not necessarily an "if you can't measure it it doesn't exist" sort of guy, but if you can only hear something you already know is there, then I gotta call BS. To me, measurements are interesting but largely irrelevant. Sound is everything. And if something is really "not subtle" or "night and day" like everyone always claims, then why should it be difficult to hear it blindfolded? It should be obvious, right?

Buy any gear that makes you happy, but realize sound quality isn't always why you're doing it.

[j_garcia]

I have not heard my player but when I got my 4060 in the mail I wanted to compare it to my Yammy universal player. All I can say is that even my girlfriend who hates all the stereo equiptment and definitly had no clue which was THOUGHT to be better said the $350 Yammie had tons better bass. Was she hearing things or did she have preconcived notions? :confused:

I actually usually use people who are admittedly NOT audiophiles, nor are they even interested in audio gear or music much for that matter, what they think of various changes in my system. I have verified my own impressions time and again this way. Not once have I found it necessary to ask WHY it sounded better or different, just that it did and someone else heard something similar. Sometimes I would not even tell them something had changed (or had not) and asked if they heard any differences. I was surprised at how often people could identify when something had been changed without knowing what it was.


Absolutely. The problem here is of mutual respect, or rather, a lack of it.

Thanks. As often seems the case in a discussion like this, it ends up feeling like a witch hunt or "holier than thou" situation. My beef is that it tends to be that the witch hunters almost always are not even OPEN to the concept that something other than their position could even be partially true. I, myself, am an "IS or IS NOT" person for the most part, and I've also been in engineering for the last 12yrs, so data, validation and proof are what my job is all about, but I am at least willing to listen to someone else's position and consider that there may be something valid there.

There are plenty of things we cannot measure or explain, but we cannot deny they exist. So why is it so hard to believe that some parts of audio might be that way. Maybe we don't have the ability to define what it is that truly characterizes what are often very subtle differences, but that does not mean it does not exist.

[mtrycrafts]

Hey everyone, just chill for a moment and stop trying to kill the other guy.

Let's look at this logically:

Chris - you've posted many links in many threads to studies showing that the levels of artifacts such as jitter and distortion in modern players are well below audible human thresholds. OK, this is pretty convincing and hard to argue against.

j_garcia, Sleestack - I agree. I'm absolutely certain I've heard major differences in the sound that comes from different players. Whilst the tests haven't been blind I have performed a few tests where I didn't know the supposed relative qualities of players, so I at least had a minimum of expectation.

So, what are we left with?

Well, if you listen to two players, and prefer one, and it's within your budget then buy it and enjoy it.

If you're interested in the science, and/or don't want to spend more money than necessary, then look at the numbers.

A DBT really isn't that practical for most, so how can we quantitively show differences between players? I was thinking of making a CDR with a 20-20k sweep, and measuring the frequency response and distortion from various CD and DVD player's analog output stages.

The crux here is:

1. Can we settle on some reference sound file - e.g. a 20-20k sweep at some dB level over x seconds?
2. Chris, mtrycrafts would you agree that this is a valid measurement?
3. Sleestack, you have multiple players, would you agree to perform some tests? I guess you'd just need a PC and a copy of the RightMark Audio Analyzer (http://rightmark.org).

Alternatively, I'll supply you guys with big sticks, and you can hit one another repeatedly for our entertainment. Just make sure you video it :D.

I am not sure where you intend to measure and with what? Not at the speakers. If you can measure the outout frequency response of the CD player, analog in this case, that would be fine to see how flat the response, what variations are at what frequency.
Better use a calibrated CD of a known level and porbably measure the ouput voltage too of the player. But, you get FR data in Sound &Video, maybe even in Stereopile too :D They tend to measure pretty well.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 75, Jun/Jul 1999.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 74, Apr/May 1999.

they compared a RCA, $80 unit against several $1000+ units, DBT, 20 trials, young listeners. Best guess was 12 of 20, not very promising :D

[mtrycrafts]

Actually, we need to organize a group of people who were blind at birth, do a hearing assessment of them, then select from that group the 10 people who have the best range of hearing, and use them to do the listening. Music cannot be used, because music doesn't matter, only numbers, so only sweeps and pink noise will be used to conduct the testing.



Hello, people don't all hear the same. What comes into your ear is the actual sound, that may be slightly modified by the particular person's overall hearing ability. Some people have a sensitivity to certain frequencies, while others may be unable to hear specific frequencies well. On top of that, what your brain processes of that signal is a perception, which means ALL HEARING is a perception, influenced by an individual's predisposition for listening for certain characteristics.


You are missing the whole issue here, sorry. Research with blind people didn't pan out that well.

Yes, we don't hear all the same, but JND data is compiled with many people and the lowest or best performers are known. CD players tend to be below threshold of ditecting such differences.
A non DBT listeing will not produce reliable results, no matter what you think you did to help.
Perception is not hearing. Have you not asked anyone in your life to repeat something you didn't understand just to be told, they didn't say anything?
That is perception, your brain making things up. Happens all the time.

What comes into your ear is the sound. But, not everything you perceive in your brain as sound in reality coming into your ear. That is perception. Knowing the real sound and a perception of sound is what you have to isolate in a credible manner. You can only do this with bias controlled protocols. Sorry.

[mtrycrafts]

I think the point mtrycrafts was making (and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong ;)) was about our perceptions between two pieces of kit being coloured because we know we're hearing different pieces of kit.

I have absolutely no doubt that what exactly we hear (perceive) is different from person to person, so I suppose it's valid that different people would perceive different sounding players in different ways. However, given two players which should sound the same (by the mtrycrafts/WmAx argument) nobody (regardless of 'how' they hear) should be able to tell the difference in a DBT. Of course, different people may have differing perceptions based on how shiny the buttons are on the front panel, but we're all human.

Perception is what the brain is telling you about sound whether that sound is real or not at all present. Separating reality, real sound, from a possible imagined perception, is the key to differentiating components, in this exercise.

DBt is to eliminate any human bias, just as in a drug trial, or any other testing using human subjects ;)
If by chance one can differentiat two playes under a credible DBT, and perhaps duplicated, then we can say that they are audibly different.
So, we really don't care if they are different, if the difference is real, from credible testing, not through biased sighted results :D

And, one can prefer anything they like.

[mtrycrafts]

So why did I think the Cyrus sounded better? Hopefully a frequency response/distortion measurement would be enlightening.


Yes, that would tell us something, unless the difference is below known thresholds ;)

How was the level difference between the players? That affects perception too.

[mtrycrafts]

What I gather form your encompassing post is to trust everything no matter what?

Why would I trust, believe, accept an opinion of dubious value?
If I have doubts, I cross check it, if it matters to me.
Perhaps we should accept reports of alien abductions because people did experience them?
How about Sylvia Browns psychic reading? They are very real to the recepient?
That is the problem in this country, believe everything, question nothing. But then, nothing has value- Carl Sagan in a speach(paraphrased) :D

[mtrycrafts]

I have not heard my player but when I got my 4060 in the mail I wanted to compare it to my Yammy universal player. All I can say is that even my girlfriend who hates all the stereo equiptment and definitly had no clue which was THOUGHT to be better said the $350 Yammie had tons better bass. Was she hearing things or did she have preconcived notions? :confused:


There are many other reasonable expanations for what she told you. She knows you are looking for differences and she gladly agreed. she is human and biased like all of us. She had a 50% chance of telling you what you wanted to hear. How do you or she knows for sure?

You know, when I stick a pipe in water, it bends. I bet she will see that bend as well. Do I trust my eyes?

But, can either of you differentiate them under bias controls, levels closely matched in a statistically significant manner? That is the real issue, not what she tells you without any controls.

I wonder then, if you use homeopathic medicines? Why not if you don't and why if you do? No difference, really.

So, in essence, this testimonial has no real value to establish audible differences.

[mtrycrafts]

I actually usually use people who are admittedly NOT audiophiles, nor are they even interested in audio gear or music much for that matter, what they think of various changes in my system. I have verified my own impressions time and again this way. Not once have I found it necessary to ask WHY it sounded better or different, just that it did and someone else heard something similar. Sometimes I would not even tell them something had changed (or had not) and asked if they heard any differences. I was surprised at how often people could identify when something had been changed without knowing what it was.
.


But you are still not getting valid answers, just unreliable ones. People are biased, no matter what, how much they know about audio or anything else.
No exemtions anywhere, no free lunch. No real answers if sighted comparison. Them are the fact, indisputable.

[mtrycrafts]

I
There are plenty of things we cannot measure or explain, but we cannot deny they exist. So why is it so hard to believe that some parts of audio might be that way. Maybe we don't have the ability to define what it is that truly characterizes what are often very subtle differences, but that does not mean it does not exist.


Easy, because it is not that way in audio. Perhaps you need to read the new poster, MrQ, an acoustic engineer, in steam vent I think.

Subtle differences can be tested for by your hearing ability. But, you just don't seem to accept the FACT that humans are biased and cannot get valid, meaningful data, results unless the bias is controlled for. Human psychology.
If you want to know if a drug really works better than a sugar pill, you do a DBT. If Paradigm wants to know if that latest design change made a difference, they conduct a DBT listening. they do have that facility, yes.

[mtrycrafts]

My beef is that it tends to be that the witch hunters almost always are not even OPEN to the concept that something other than their position could even be partially true. I, myself, am an "IS or IS NOT" person for the most part, and I've also been in engineering for the last 12yrs, so data, validation and proof are what my job is all about, but I am at least willing to listen to someone else's position and consider that there may be something valid there.



How can you be open to a flawed protocol, that being data gathered from biased listening in this case?
what is there to entertain?
We are after answers, and this issue is nothing new, not cutting edge examination of ideas and issues but been examined for 30+ years and psychoacoustics been studied for over 100 year for sure.
With your background, I expect you to be the last one to accept anecdotes and testimonials as factual and reliable. Or, does this hobby gives a free pass on it?

[mtrycrafts]

Buy any gear that makes you happy, but realize sound quality isn't always why you're doing it.

You hit it squarely on the head :D

[mtrycrafts]

"Please explain what, between a $100 player vs. the $500[no, go ahead and make that $15,000] player is going to differentiate the sound in an audible manner"

How about mass? Quality of build and components? You do you believe that the componets in a $100 player and a $1000 player are the same? Also I would never assume that a product is better due to price without doing research and listening. Also what about reliability? Is the motor in the $100 as good? Is the board manufactured as carefully?

What do you use as a cd player just for reference? I just finished modding my Toshiba 4060 and yes I can hear the difference.


Mass in a CD player affecting sound? Serious?

Built and component issues will be reflected on the specs but what is there to IC boards?
Reliablility by makers can be found at Consumer Reports :D

Maybe your modding really affected the specs to a high level of detection ;)

[jaxvon]

I think mass would be a part of many things. A bigger power supply, more regulation circuits, heavy duty transport mechanism to eliminate any skipping, thick metal chassis, etc.

Also keep in mind that, like Sleestack said, there can be a big difference in analog stages. Heck, I would venture to say there would be a measureable and audible difference in a CD player made in the traditional fasion and one built like the RE Designs SCPA-1 preamp (point to point wiring, coax in signal path). A poorly built analog section will have line noise, poor stereo separation, audible crosstalk, etc.

[sploo]

I am not sure where you intend to measure and with what? Not at the speakers. If you can measure the outout frequency response of the CD player, analog in this case, that would be fine to see how flat the response, what variations are at what frequency.
Better use a calibrated CD of a known level and porbably measure the ouput voltage too of the player. But, you get FR data in Sound &Video, maybe even in Stereopile too :D They tend to measure pretty well.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 75, Jun/Jul 1999.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 74, Apr/May 1999.

they compared a RCA, $80 unit against several $1000+ units, DBT, 20 trials, young listeners. Best guess was 12 of 20, not very promising :D

What I'm trying to work out is, given the same room, speakers, amp etc., why do different players sound different? If jitter and distortion are below audible thresholds, then surely there's not much left other than frequency response.

Playing an audio CD with a constant volume frequency sweep, then measuring the frequency response at the analogue output stage of the CDP, would surely tell you why the player sounds the way it does. Or am I missing something here?

[sts9fan]

"There are many other reasonable expanations for what she told you. She knows you are looking for differences and she gladly agreed. she is human and biased like all of us. She had a 50% chance of telling you what you wanted to hear. How do you or she knows for sure?"

We both listen to the same track on both players. This was the forst time we had listened to the 4960. Without me saying a thing she said "The bass on this one sucks can we now listen to the disk all the way through and stop this stupid sh!t?".

Maybe we were bias. I am sure I was but through all the hype on the intrawebs I may have been bias to the 4960 for all I know. I am not phsycologist.

As for the mass thing I was talking about overall build quaility which means something to me.

[Buckle-meister]

What I gather from your encompassing post is to trust everything no matter what?

Although you do not quote me, I presume from the above that you refer to myself. Assuming this to be the case, I believe you have misunderstood my meaning.

Of course I do not blindly trust everything I am told. You must know this. My eyes are open. I would like to think that I will always politely listen to others opinions and then make up my own mind as to whether or not I accept them or not. But what I do not do is infer or state that the person is wrong for thinking what they do. It is not my place to judge them; they are as free to think what they will as I am.

Why would I trust, believe, accept an opinion of dubious value?

I am not saying that you should. If that is how what is being said comes across to you, then don't trust, believe or accept it. But don't put the person in question down for thinking what they do. Yours is not to judge.

Perhaps we should accept reports of alien abductions because people did experience them?

Perhaps we should. Personally, I'm very sceptical about alien abductions. But if a person tells me that they believe they were abducted, who am I to say they weren't? I wasn't there at the time it happened. I don't have their experiance of it to relate to. So how can I possibly make the statement that they are wrong?; that they only imagined the whole afair? To do so would make me a hypocrite.

Nobody here doubts the value or proof of DBT's mtrycrafts, and I firmly believe that everybody here would accept the results of a DBT test on themselves, even were it to contradict what they may initially have thought. Can I say that I am not simply imagining the differences between my old CD player and new DVD player? No. Is it possible that a DBT would reveal this to be true? Absolutely. Would I accept that I had just imagined the differences all along if the DBT test concluded this? Yes, without a seconds hesitation.

The thing I believe you don't realise mtrycrafts, is that all the 'others' in the same 'camp' would, I believe, act exactly the same way. But until that day comes, we are innocent until proven guilty. You cannot infer or state that we are imagining things because the test has not been made.

That is the problem in this country, believe everything, question nothing.

Nobody is telling you what to believe, nor to question nothing. Do you truly believe that everybody in this country thinks the same? Then why brand them all as sheep?

Finally, I know my last few posts must surely come across as having had a go at yourself and WmAx. Please know that this is not the case. In one of my first ever posts, I wrote:

Finally, thanks for your replies. I am discovering that it can sometimes be quite tricky to post replies; most especially opinions, without conveying the feeling of 'stepping on someones toes'! :( It is not my intension to do so to anybody.

mtrycrafts, you responded:

Hey, don't feel like the Lone Ranger :p You will get the hang of it and stepping on toes are why we are here. :D Besides, no one will phisically strike back, I hope. Part of learning, asking and part of life.

I hope we remain friends.

Kind regards

Robbie

[miklorsmith]

Mtry wants you to do the testing so he can show you you're wrong. If your test ends up positive, he wants to analyze, break down, and fault the test. If you change the test and still get a positive result, he'll do it again. He will never stop, ever, until the last subjectivist is converted. Do you understand? This is not a game.

Seriously, I have doubts about the testing. I'm sure testing discovers some things but if it can't separate amplifiers, it don't work.

But, this thread is degenerating like so many promising before. . .

[Buckle-meister]

But, this thread is degenerating like so many promising before. . .

What makes you think that?

Regards

[miklorsmith]

It started with questions about audible differences (?) between different technologies and types of players. I believe players sound different and was looking for first-hand expertise. There were a couple of folks with considerable experience that seem to have wafted away on the winds of doubt.

Now we're talking DBT. Whee. I've been here many times before. Guess how many people have changed opinions or even expressed any new facets?

[j_garcia]

Give 100, 500, 1000 (however many you like) people the same selection of songs or sounds to listen to, and then ask them what they heard. Do you think you will get the same answer from everyone, or even half of them?

Have you not asked anyone in your life to repeat something you didn't understand just to be told, they didn't say anything? That is perception, your brain making things up. Happens all the time.

...sounds like schizophrenia to me. What this typically turns out to be is that you DID hear something, the person in question just wasn't the origin or the sound...

We're talking about DBT because that's what the "there is no difference" camp insists on for everything that they consider to have no difference.

[miklorsmith]

. . .and the degeneration is that it prevents the rest of us from discussing what we intended to and wanted to in the first place.

[Buckle-meister]

It started with questions about audible differences...

Ah, I see. Sorry for helping it go further down another path.

Regards

[WmAx]

Given that I had talked about the difference between various players a few posts prior, I think it is natural to assume that your statements were meant to be applicable to my post as well.

For clarification: I did not reply to the post you are referring to.

I can't seem to get you to talk about any specific product, so perhaps we all just need to hit the books so we can reach your level of aural enlightenment.

I never mentioned a specific product, because that was not my intention, but to generalize performance limitations vs. a relative price point.

-Chris

[WmAx]

How about mass? Quality of build and components? You do you believe that the componets in a $100 player and a $1000 player are the same? Also I would never assume that a product is better due to price without doing research and listening. Also what about reliability? Is the motor in the $100 as good? Is the board manufactured as carefully?

Build quality, cosmetics and reliability are not part of my posts, and are other variables to be considered. As I have stated in the past, if someone prefers something for whatever reason, then they should use the preferred device. I am not arguing preference of specific products.

What do you use as a cd player just for reference? I just finished modding my Toshiba 4060 and yes I can hear the difference.

I don't answer such questions in this type of discussion. I can theoretically be deaf, and it would not make a difference to my posts in this thread, since I have not claimed to be able to hear anything in this thread.

-Chris

[WmAx]

But you do. You commonly ask that people justify their observations with raw data. Yet their observations are just that; observations. They might not carry any weight in your eyes, but for others, they do.

People are free to choose who they give credibility, obviously. However, I will ensure that the perspectives are explained, so that the other variables[psychological bias effects, actual technical issues and limitations, etc.] in these situations are known by general people. I wish that I did not have to appear to be so abrasive, but if I[and others] take a more passive approach in these issues, I fear this forum will turn into another audioreview or audioasylum. In case you have not read those forums: the signal to noise ratio is very low, so it's difficult for a general person to differentiate fact from fiction.


Trust them! It doesn't matter whether they only thought they heard something that wasn't there at all. For them, it did exist. It was part of their reality. I'd bet any money that even though these same people may disagree with passages of text you have written, they don't think any less of you.

Then all they need do is agree or state in the first place that it is their perception, and not insist that as if it is an absolute fact of difference without offering supporting evidence.

As have I. I bought a Yamaha S2500 universal player recently. I use the same coaxial cable from the player to the DSP-Z9 that I did from my previous Musical Fidelity CD player. In each case, I know I am using the player only as a transport. I know that I should't hear a difference. But I simply cannot escape the fact that I can. :)

You are already aware of the relevant variables and possibilities[as I know you have read similar threads to this in which I participated in the past], so I will not respond to this unless you have a specific query.

-Chris

[WmAx]

My beef is that it tends to be that the witch hunters almost always are not even OPEN to the concept that something other than their position could even be partially true.

I, personally, am open to changing my position, if credible/verified data is shown to support such.

[/quote]There are plenty of things we cannot measure or explain, but we cannot deny they exist. So why is it so hard to believe that some parts of audio might be that way. Maybe we don't have the ability to define what it is that truly characterizes what are often very subtle differences, but that does not mean it does not exist.[/QUOTE]

No one has shown an unquantifiable factor to affect audio in a repeatable valid double-blind test. While it is reasonable to pose 'if' type questions, it is not reasonable to move them beyond the point of highly-questionable theories unless substantial evidence exists. To accept a mysterious factor to exist in audio signals would be like accepting ghosts to be real, without scientifically valid data to back up the assertions. So, until such data is produced, it can not be accepted as a fact if an efficient system of discovery[this is all that science is] is desired.

-Chris

[WmAx]

Perhaps we should. Personally, I'm very sceptical about alien abductions. But if a person tells me that they believe they were abducted, who am I to say they weren't? I wasn't there at the time it happened. I don't have their experiance of it to relate to. So how can I possibly make the statement that they are wrong?; that they only imagined the whole afair? To do so would make me a hypocrite.

If you want a valuable resource of advice/information that is based on primarily proven information, you have to hold high standards/burden for anything that is claimed as a fact or absolute. If you want to see the result of accepting everyone's opinion as basicly equal without supporting data, please go www.audioasylum.com and read for a while. If you let every lunatic with an opinion say whatever they desire and allow all opinions to be held equally, the result is a low quality source of information. If someone has an opinion or perception, they need to make it clear that is was a perception or speculation. They should know better than to claim as a fact, and if they don't, people who do know better should correct them if the quality of information on the forum is to remain high.

-Chris

[kay]

Those DBT tests between $80 and $1000 CD players - can anyone scan them by any chance? No ways for me to get those issues out here :(

[Buckle-meister]

If you want to see the result of accepting everyone's opinion as basicly equal..

Sorry WmAx, but I do hold everybodys opinion as being equal. There is not a single person better than another. As I wrote earlier, whether or not I choose to accept a persons opinion is my prerogative, and a seporate issue entirely.

If you let every lunatic with an opinion say whatever they desire and allow all opinions to be held equally, the result is a low quality source of information. If someone has an opinion or perception, they need to make it clear that is was a perception or speculation. They should know better than to claim as a fact, and if they don't, people who do know better should correct them if the quality of information on the forum is to remain high.

Aren't you taking a bit too much on yourself? Isn't it the moderators job to moderate?

Regards

[miklorsmith]

Shouldn't the subjectivists be able to hold a discussion, with the objectivists chiming in, without every discussion ending on the common subject of testing? This is an immovable object for all of us and let's just forget it.

Were we to replay this thread, people would express opinions, including the people making theoretical statements that no audibility exists. Anybody offering anything NEW to the discussion is welcome to attend.

Yes, this too is moderator material, but I'm trying to find a way we can all express ourselves without every discussion ending at an impasse with a minimum of real information exchanged.

I gave up at AA and I'm not looking for that, but nor do I think it prudent for "company policy" to reflect the "nothing matters" viewpoint.

[Buckle-meister]

This is an immovable object for all of us and let's just forget it.

Suits me. I'm quite flexible. WmAx has also indicated that he feels the same. However, by not resolving this discussion-in-the-guise-of-an-argument now, you do realise that it'll only appear again sooner or later?

Why not try to resolve it now? Then I can invite you all around for a drink at mine (friends only I'm afraid), we can all have a good debate whilst getting absolutely stinking drunk. Mtrycrafts, WmAx, you can prove to me that I'm just imagining everything, and I can let you bear witness to the fact that I'm not!

Now that sounds like a world I'd love to live in.

Regards

[sploo]

No one has shown an unquantifiable factor to affect audio in a repeatable valid double-blind test. While it is reasonable to pose 'if' type questions, it is not reasonable to move them beyond the point of highly-questionable theories unless substantial evidence exists. To accept a mysterious factor to exist in audio signals would be like accepting ghosts to be real, without scientifically valid data to back up the assertions. So, until such data is produced, it can not be accepted as a fact if an efficient system of discovery[this is all that science is] is desired.

I think Chris, in a world where millions of people live, die, and sometimes kill, on their belief in religions which have pretty much zero scientific backing, you're fighting a losing battle. Not that I don't agree with what you're saying.

Shouldn't the subjectivists be able to hold a discussion, with the objectivists chiming in, without every discussion ending on the common subject of testing? This is an immovable object for all of us and let's just forget it.

Fair point - but let me ask you this - if I made a claim on a subject which you knew well, and you were absolutely certain I was completely wrong, and was almost certainly misleading people who were asking for information, surely you'd say something?

Whilst I think WmAx and mtrycrafts are a little DBT obsessed, they do back up what they're saying with, what I understand to be, credible research. As WmAx pointed out in the text I've quoted, if we start believing in mysterious factors in audio that cannot be quantified, we might as well believe in anything.

Now, does that mean that there are no mysterious factors in audio? Well, the world of science thinks it knows it all, until the next discovery comes along and disproves our current assumptions. So, yes, there may well be stuff we can't currently measure.

However, if these things are audible, which is all that matters for us humans, then we do at least have a way to check for differences without bias - we're back to DBTs. Does take all the fun out of it though, don't it?

[miklorsmith]

I'm not proposing that anybody be silenced - quite the opposite. Sorry if it came across that way. What I'm saying is that these threads always end the same, to little real effect. This thread was about players and ended up about DBT. When the same things get repeated time after time after time after time, people who were interested in the original topic get tired and go away. Thus, the "interested" become disinterested and the fundamental point of the exchange is lost.

Everyone should be able to say whatever they want. But, the same message should not interrupt, sidetrack, and kill the essential point as has happened here. THAT is what silences the life and potential.

[PENG]

I'm not necessarily an "if you can't measure it it doesn't exist" sort of guy, but if you can only hear something you already know is there, then I gotta call BS. To me, measurements are interesting but largely irrelevant. Sound is everything. And if something is really "not subtle" or "night and day" like everyone always claims, then why should it be difficult to hear it blindfolded? It should be obvious, right?

Buy any gear that makes you happy, but realize sound quality isn't always why you're doing it.

I agree with Rob 100%. I like electronic toys, but I must admit I could not hear any significant difference in sound quality between my Adcom and Bryston amp. I do feel the Bryston has a wider sound stage and more dynamic but in a DBT I think I would fail to tell them apart.

For those who claim "night and day" difference between gears, they should have no problem passing any DBT and there is no need for them to deny the validity of DBT.

One question for Chris and mtrycrafts, I have a C$115 DVD player that does a good job with DVD movies but if I put a CD in it, anyone can hear the difference between it and my Sony NS725P (C$225 2 years ago) or my Denon 3910. Why is it that the cheap DVD player can play DVD movies/music so well and yet so hopeless with CDs? Anyone has similar experience?

[PENG]

Mtry wants you to do the testing so he can show you you're wrong. If your test ends up positive, he wants to analyze, break down, and fault the test. If you change the test and still get a positive result, he'll do it again. He will never stop, ever, until the last subjectivist is converted. Do you understand? This is not a game.



I hope you are not serious........

[Sleestack]

I'm not proposing that anybody be silenced - quite the opposite. Sorry if it came across that way. What I'm saying is that these threads always end the same, to little real effect. This thread was about players and ended up about DBT. When the same things get repeated time after time after time after time, people who were interested in the original topic get tired and go away. Thus, the "interested" become disinterested and the fundamental point of the exchange is lost.


Exactly. I'm sitting here looking at a Meridian G08, Classe Omega SACD2, Underwood Ultimate Mod. Denon 3910, Denon 5910, Onix CD1, Onix CD-2 and Onix XCD-99. I would love to discuss them, and I'm sure they would be of interest to many members, but why bother? I'm not sitting around doing DBTs and I will use words like "detail", so my opinions are considered useless by the ministers of linearity. Furthermore, why bother talking about specific products when you can simply repeat mantras that are suitable for every discussion?

I have a pair of Epiphany 12-12s on the way. I expect that they will be incredible speakers, but I doubt I'll ever bother discussing them here.

[Duffinator]

I have a pair of Epiphany 12-12s on the way. I expect that they will be incredible speakers, but I doubt I'll ever bother discussing them here.After googling those speakers I hope you do give us your impressions of them. Probably not speakers most of us will ever own but I'm sure many would enjoy reading your thoughts on them.

[sploo]

the ministers of linearity.

:D Having finished chuckling at that, I'm sure I've seen a post from one of our two ministers, basically making the point that there is merit to expensive CD players having an induced non-linear response (if you like it) and that, as long as you accept you're paying a greater premium for the change in sound than actually exists in the componentry, then go for it.

I have a pair of Epiphany 12-12s on the way. I expect that they will be incredible speakers, but I doubt I'll ever bother discussing them here.

Naah. They'll never sound any good, not enough drivers in 'em :p.

[Rob Babcock]

I hope you do post about the Epiphanies. I've dreamt of them, and if the closest I'll ever come to them is hearing you talk about them, don't deny me even that! :p

[Buckle-meister]

...if I [and others] take a more passive approach in these issues, I fear this forum will turn into another audioreview or audioasylum. In case you have not read those forums: the signal to noise ratio is very low...

I have briefly visited the above sites. And yes, I totally agree; I don't think they're up to much either.

Then all they need do is agree or state in the first place that it is their perception, and not insist that as if it is an absolute fact of difference without offering supporting evidence.

My opinion is that...

In my opinion....

Seems fairly clear to me...

Regards

[PENG]

I have a pair of Epiphany 12-12s on the way. I expect that they will be incredible speakers, but I doubt I'll ever bother discussing them here.

Please do tell us about those speakers (I assume it will be in the loudspeaker and subwoofers section). I have never seen any "all speakers sound same" type of debates. No one is going to talk about DB testing speakers. Safe to go!

[sts9fan]

"I can theoretically be deaf, and it would not make a difference to my posts in this thread, since I have not claimed to be able to hear anything in this thread."

thats the biggest load I have ever heard. The fact is audio is about hearing and what you hear. The fact is everybodys brain is different and can translate data differently. There is no machine in the world that can tell you if say Jerry garcia's voice sounds EXACTLY the same to everyone.

I would never listen to a blind art critic

[miklorsmith]

Sleestack - I for one would be very interested in your non-repeatable observations of the listed players. I'm an active gearhead, though not of your means (yet). My next speakers in a couple months will be Zu Definitions. They will provide a great lens to examine future component swaps. Don't mind the static.

[WmAx]

"I can theoretically be deaf, and it would not make a difference to my posts in this thread, since I have not claimed to be able to hear anything in this thread."

thats the biggest load I have ever heard. The fact is audio is about hearing and what you hear. The fact is everybodys brain is different and can translate data differently. There is no machine in the world that can tell you if say Jerry garcia's voice sounds EXACTLY the same to everyone.

I would never listen to a blind art critic

My argument does not depend on my hearing. I never even claimed that I could hear in this thread. My argument is based on the merit of my points. What use are my biased perception(s)? I am[as is any human] subject to the effects of perception bias. If I listened to two CD players under standard listening conditions and believed that I hear a difference, so what? It does not mean there is a real difference. That must be decided with careful measurement plus correlation to perceptual research or by bias controlled listening tests. Therefor, the information that I present will revolve around hearing tests only when such tests are performed under bias controlled conditions and/or supported by existing prior perceptual research.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

Sleestack - I for one would be very interested in your non-repeatable observations of the listed players. I'm an active gearhead, though not of your means (yet). My next speakers in a couple months will be Zu Definitions. They will provide a great lens to examine future component swaps. Don't mind the static.


Send me a pm and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have about my specific gear.... that goes for anyone. I'm just not patient enought to sit around and attempt to quantify and justify every adjective and adverb I use to describe my gear.

[WmAx]

Exactly. I'm sitting here looking at a Meridian G08, Classe Omega SACD2, Underwood Ultimate Mod. Denon 3910, Denon 5910, Onix CD1, Onix CD-2 and Onix XCD-99. I would love to discuss them, and I'm sure they would be of interest to many members, but why bother? I'm not sitting around doing DBTs and I will use words like "detail", so my opinions are considered useless by the ministers of linearity. Furthermore, why bother talking about specific products when you can simply repeat mantras that are suitable for every discussion?

I have a pair of Epiphany 12-12s on the way. I expect that they will be incredible speakers, but I doubt I'll ever bother discussing them here.

I think you can freely express your opinions without interference on any product or subject in a thread that's topic is clearly one intended for subjective discussion. I don't think anyone has a problem with such a discussion. The [I]problems arise when subjective impressions are used in place of substantial data in a technical discussion.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

I think you can freely express your opinions without interference on any product or subject in a thread that's topic is clearly one intended for subjective discussion. I don't think anyone has a problem with such a discussion. The [I]problems arise when subjective impressions are used in place of substantial data in a technical discussion.

-Chris


How was this thread necessarily a request objective data rather than subjective impressions? Do you really think that to the thread starter, your theoretical comments were any more helpful than my subjective impressions? Furthermore, I'm not going to be engaging in scientific studies anytime soon, so should I just not bother talking about my gear?

Are you saying that threads should be identified as "requests for subjective impressions?" I guess you have a problem with he Audioholics reviews given that they use quite a few subjective impresions as well. Shouldn't they leave that fluff out and stick with their hard data or at least warn readers?

Why bother listing at all when you can see everything on paper? Your perceptions will deceive you anyway. At least on paper, you know exactly what you are supposed to be hearing.

It is good for you that you are pursuing the truth in audio and video without having to use real equipment. I'm sure it is very cost effective. Nevertheless, I think I'll stick to giving my useless opinions using actual pieces of equipment. Somehow that seems to be more fun for me. I wonder why?

[miklorsmith]

To me, audio is about the journey and experience. The gear is fun to me, though I really don't care what it looks like (aside from obscenely ugly stuff).

I can seriously envision a thread with two separate sides and no common ground. One side doen't acknowledge the other. Two separate worlds, coincident, without commonality.

Example:

Originator: I just love my new Dynamig 4000, the buttery highs are sublime!

Response: You can't hear that. It's a figment of your butter-addled imagination.

3rd party: Wow! Cool!! My Dynamig is great too, but to me it's the Laker-girl tight (bass) that is smokin'!

Response2: You people are sheep.

Originator: What speakers are you using with your Dynamig?

Response3: I'm with Response1 and 2. Bits are bits.

You get the idea. This way, everyone could have their say and we wouldn't grind to a halt. Third parties could align themselves however they saw fit. Everyone wins!

Miklorsmith for prez! (hey, 200th post!!)

[Buckle-meister]

The gear is fun to me, though I really don't care what it looks like (aside from obscenely ugly stuff).!

Mostly I agree. There was a time when, had I the money, I would have bought obscenely priced gear if it meant having the 'best' ;) sound possible, even were it to look ghastly.

Not now. I still want to have the absolute best gear that I can afford, but, at the end of the day, I've got to be able to live with it. It's not that looks are everything. They're not. But the music isn't the only variable anymore.

Miklorsmith for prez!

Best, perhaps, that I don't comment on that either. ;)

Regards

[indcrimdefense]

I have a 15 year old Nakamichi CD player, and when I purchased my Denon 2910 several months ago, was hard pressed to tell the difference for redbook CD. The Nak obviously lacks SACD or DVDA, and I was able to notice an increase in the sound quality of SACD & DVDA, particularly when the next listening selection is a redbook CD. Currently have a demo Rotel RCD 1072, and depending on the source material, have not notice any difference between the Rotel & Denon, or a very marked difference depending on what components each was connected to. As I'm currently in demo heaven, with 1 receiver, 2 pre/pro's, 2 amps, and 2 cd players, the differences between the Rotel & Denon 2910 I attribute to the other components, as when I ran both on the same components, with the same cd, back to back, limited only by how fast I could switch the CD, I was hard pressed to find a difference. I was able to hear a difference between digital & analog playback, but no noticeable difference comparing Rotel analog to Denon analog, and same for digital. As I already own a 2910, and the rotel is only a CD player, I was pleasantly surprised to hear little or no difference. Any difference I heard I attribute more to the other components (Rotel cd w/ rotel stereo pre & rotel 1080 amp was very forward & bright, with poor vocals, where Rotel CD w/ Cary Cinema 6 pre/pro & Cary Cinema 5 amp sounded very good, with exceptional vocal quality). As the 2910 supports so many formats, and the Rotel only plays CD's, I see no need to buy the Rotel. This is not to disparage the Rotel, it's a quality CD player. But for virtually the same price, and with no real differences in sound quality, the Denon is a better player for my money as it is able to support more formats than only redbook CD.

I live in Indianapolis, and the local availability of SACD & DVDA is slim to none. Can anyone recommend a good website with a wide variety of SACD/DVDA and good prices?

As I have hundreds of redbook CD's, I am still interested in purchasing a quality redbook CD player, and better yet if it supported SACD & DVDA. However unwilling to pay for another CD player unless the sound quality is better than my 2910. I would prefer another universal player, but would be willing to purchase a CD only unit if the sound quality was a substantial improvement.

And Sleestack, please continue to post. You personally own equipment that I can only hear rarely, and your insight into this forum is greatly appreciated.

[miklorsmith]

Sounds like you've got a winner!

[no man]

i've got one, i think its..maybe 5-7 years old, don't have it handy so i cant tell you the maker, but i've been browsing for a new cd player and ive borrowed some friends cd players and compared, only to come to the conclusion... sounds pretty much the same...

the only reason i want a new cd player is because my old one can't play mp3 cd's, and as you all know, they can hold way, way more music (about 200 tracks, as apposed to a audio cd sitting at 20 tracks), and my old one has no anti skip protection so, when you're walking with it, with every step and turn, it skips so basicly its a waist of money, and batteries. i recently got an mp3 player, about 80 dollars, its got good sound and decent memory, 128mb's, ok well not so decent memory, i want to get a hard drive mp3 player but i'm not that interested in ipods due to their faggotry, what i mean is that you have to get everything seperately, the dock, the cords, sometimes even the ****ing 50 dollar head phones (obserd price for freakin' headphones). i'm looking for a cheap 10-20 gig mp3 player, but i'm saving for an xbox 360, games, and accesories.

[jaxvon]

$50 is absurd for Phones? I must be crazy. I got some $100 headphones and compared to the others I was looking at, they were cheap.

[Sleestack]

$50 is absurd for Phones? I must be crazy. I got some $100 headphones and compared to the others I was looking at, they were cheap.

LOL. I sponsored a Head-fi meet at one of our hotels this past weekend. There were at least 5 pairs of headphone with $3K+ price tags there. Mine are comparatively modest: AKG K1000s ($900) and Sennheiser HD650s($400). Then you have to get to the headphone amps, which can range from $40 DIY jobs, to $15K behemoths. Again, mine are modest by some standards: Singlepower MPX3 fully upgraded ($2600) and EAR Yoshino V20 ($5500).

[no man]

holy ****...just out of curiosity...who buys $5500 headphones??

[jaxvon]

If you have the income, why not? I personally would like to hear the Sennheiser Orpheus phones with their matching tube amp. I'd bet they'd be like buttah.

[no man]

no offence or anything, but why spend that much money on a pair of..headphones?

[no man]

right, i didnt see that response, i guess but there are many other things you could use that money toward, like a new tv (something i need..)

[jaxvon]

Alright, for me it might be rediculous to drop $1k on headphones, but that's me. When you have the income like Sleestack does, you can buy $30k of new gear at the drop of a hat. When you consider that from what he's posted, one of his many systems cost over $40k, $7k on headphones isn't very much out of line with the rest.

[Sleestack]

right, i didnt see that response, i guess but there are many other things you could use that money toward, like a new tv (something i need..)


Some people don't have the space for a speaker setup so they invest their money in high end headphone setups. I think many people would be surprised at how good an excellent heaphone setup can sound.

Other people like me simply like having both speakers and headphones. They are very different ways to listen to music, but both can be equally gratifying. Personally, I prefer my speaker setups, but I also love late night listeing under the cans.

Everyone has a different budget, so nothing ever surprises me. I have a friend who spends up to $5K on a single dinner... for himself!

[no man]

i wish i had that kind of income, but then again ive got lots of time, many years i should say to get on my game, whats you're friend do to make that much? what do you do to make that much? well you say that before but...yea

[no man]

guess my age and i'll give you a shiney nickel, plus 6 cents for shipping and handeling, so you'll owe me a penny :)

[WmAx]

no offence or anything, but why spend that much money on a pair of..headphones?

Just depends on if you like them enough, eh? :) I love music, and I love music even more when it's played back over a superb playback device. I keep a couple of really nice portable audio systems around for on-the-go use[though I've never had to spend as much as your example for a superb headphone]. Why should one be limited to great sound only at home? Of course, some people have their headphone systems set up only for stationary use at home; due to space constraints, noise issues or for just the unique perspective of headphone listening.

-Chris

[no man]

i agree WmAx, dude..i agree, ive got a computer, 2 tv, a crummy sterio (crummy because its old, got great sound and all, but i want hook it up to my computer or anything else), a dvd player, i plan to get a $200+++ home theater system but not over 500, cheapo theater :), but all give good sound, exept my 20" tv which is practicly anchient (it tends to loose its signal very often, gotta go up to it and slam it for it to get its reception back, happens all the time...)

[Rob Babcock]

I've never found headphones that felt comfortable enough on my head to wear very long. But I just hate headwear in general.

[Sleestack]

I've never found headphones that felt comfortable enough on my head to wear very long. But I just hate headwear in general.


I'd have to agree. I can spend about 30 minutes under the 650s before they start to annoy me. That's part of the reason I got K1000s.... they don't actually touch your ears.

[no man]

who's made the most expensive headphones?

[no man]

i'm guessing the cheapest are the ones that come with your peanuts on an airplain..

[MDS]

i'm guessing the cheapest are the ones that come with your peanuts on an airplain..

The don't give you headphones anymore. You have to buy them for $5 (or bring your own) if you want to watch the in-flight movie.

I personally would never pay more than $100 for a pair of headphones. I paid $79 for a pair of Sony MDR-V6 and they are good enough for me.

[Sleestack]

who's made the most expensive headphones?

Sennheiser Orpheus... over $5K

Sony Qualia - $3500

Those are the ones I have had a chance to listen to.

[jaxvon]

Sleestack, how are the Orpheus phones? Did you listen with the associated amp?

[WmAx]

i'm guessing the cheapest are the ones that come with your peanuts on an airplain..

I think the cheapest ones are probably the ones that can be found in a one-dollar store on a regular basis.

-Chris

[Sleestack]

Sleestack, how are the Orpheus phones? Did you listen with the associated amp?


They were quite amazing. I didn't use the associated amp, but another high end amp with balanced outputs. Extremely transparent heaphones. I would consider getting them but I'm spendiung less and less time under the cans.