| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
January 13, 2009 - 1:33pm
#1
CD Quality with high end audio
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Yes, the better your system is, the greater the number of CDs in your collection will sound bad.
Seriously.
Please don't blame bad sounding recordings on "digital," or on analog for that matter. Both good and bad recordings are the result of human skill and workmanship, not the medium used for recording. One of the best sounding CDs I have is from the early 1960s, a greatest hits collection by Bert Kaempfert. It is simply stunning in its clarity and depth and stereo spread yada yada. Of course, being from the early 1960s means it was recorded analog, but being on CD means conversion to digital did not harm the sound. See what I mean?
--Ethan
Absolutely Rich. Of course mics, venue, and placement all make a difference in a recording. However, take Mapleshade which uses tape to record and then AD conversion vs another recording that uses a poor quality recording console with dozens of ICs, if not more, and other poor quality parts in the signal path. Both contain analog, but the latter is much more complex, using many more poor quality parts (and complex designs) as well as more adjustments in the circuit path.
However, some recordings have alot of added "effects" by design, so they are bound to sound different and not as accurate by design.
CDs can sound great but it takes top notch recording equipment and minimalized, optimized circuitry.
HM, the old problem of the closer you get to the truth the less you want to know (hear). I know it's heresy with audio puritans these days but some of these problems can be alleviated, if not fully eliminated, with tone controls. Remember them?
A recent aquisition of the Meridian 808.2 has altered some of my ideas about many 'badly recorded' CD's. On this player, on my system, CD's that previously to my ears had a very harsh treble are now far less painful. I dont' think the 808.2 is rolling off the treble either and although I don't understand how Meridian have managed to turn some 'bad recordings' into listenable ones I've not heard another high-end player perform this trick - - yet.
And yes, bad and good recordings can be made in any medium. I still have several pre-recorded cassettes ( I know, they're not high-end) that sound absolutely spell binding on my Nakamichi 'Dragon'.
That is what I thought..thanks guys ! I did notice that a lot of my GRP CD's from the early era of CD's sound particulary harsh and these are DDD recordings. I agree that what goes on the CD is a mixture of what the engineer puts in.
I agree and think you are on to something JS. Alot of the problems actually has to do with the analog portion of the recording system (as well as playback system).
I have been "working" on bypassing the entire analog and mute sections of a few CD players (output from the DA converter) and the sound always improves, with less distortion, esp in the high frequencies. Of course one loses approximately 6db of gain, but the sound is better. The entire analog portion of the CD player has less than $5.00 worth of cheap parts and electrolytic coupling capacitors. No wonder the poor sound.
Again, I think you are onto something JS.
"I still have several pre-recorded cassettes ( I know, they're not high-end) that sound absolutely spell binding on my Nakamichi 'Dragon'."
Cassettes, even on an average player, are more correct-sounding, with morer natural midrange and treble, than CD. Generally speaking. Much must be done to the playback system to bring the CD up to the standards of the humble cassette.
Cheerio
MAYBE if you recorded using the best quality media on a Nakamichi Dragon using a great turntable setup ('table, cartridge, and phonostage) and a phenomenal pressing. But pre-recorded tape? No chance! What about CD's better Signal to Noise Ratio, speed stability, bass extension, and it lack of reduction in quality over time? There are some arguments that a great record played back on great analog front end can out perform CD but a pre-recorded tape? That is pure madness and taking the whole "audio is all subjective" far too far.
I don't disagree mrlowry but I surprised myself a week ago - i put an old mix tape on my JVC cassette deck (a long ways from a Nak Dragon!) and instead of doing my intended chores I was drawn into the music and sat down and just listened. It sounded good - not as good as my cd and vinyl sources but good. It played the music well - I dug it.
"What about CD's better Signal to Noise Ratio, speed stability, bass extension, and it lack of reduction in quality over time?"
You can throw them all out. Cassettes (for the most part, I won't say always) sound more musical, more "realistic" and smoother (i.e., less harsh); the pitch is better, bass is fuller and more correct sounding and they're more "analog sounding." On the other hand, CDs (generally speaking, again) even on big expensive systems, tend to sound laid back, uninvolving, threadbare, compressed, peculiar-sounding and synthetic, distorted, shrill as well as lacking the very fine nuances.
I think that about covers it.
Much and all as I love my Nakamichi 'Dragon' I can't agree it's as accurate as my turntable or CD player.
You mention only the mid and treble of 'the humble cassette player'. Well, the bass on the Dragon is astonishing but only very well recorded cassettes made on metal tape get anywhere near the treble quality of similar recordings as I hear them off my CD player and turntable. Still, it's amazing how often I manage to forget to put on my judgmental audiophool hat when listening to the Dragon and just get dragged into the music. Maybe I'm just easy to please though?
There's another issue here I'd like to mention about CD recording quality . Early CD's recorded with treble emphasis, if played back on today's machines that often come without any ability to recognize this, and de-emphasize that treble boost, can make some really horrible noises.
What kind of CD player could you possibly be using to get such results? I bet if you took a CD and recorded a tape copy of it on a Nakamichi Dragon, then played it back it would
"If I read between the line of what you've said what it really boils down to is that you like the coloration (in this case technical limitations) that the cassette is adding and/or subtracting. The rounding of edges that in real life (and in good reproduction) are a little biting. One could say the they LIKE the sound of cassette more than CD but to claim that it is more ACCURATE or true to real live sound is ABSOLUTELY ABSURD!"
Geez, why did you have to go put words in my mouth? I didn't say any of those things! Please read my post again.
Ta, ta for now
The other day I listened to Deja Vu by Crosby Stills Nash & Young again on CD. Now keep in mind that I picked this up when it was first issues on CD and it sounded great. I then listened to an early Joni Mitchell (Blue) and it sounded horrible-condensed and too much treble.
Now when CD's were first being mfg a lot of them were just transferred without and remastering and that may have something to do with it but like one poster said here what goes in comes out and as thus a lot has to do with how the master recording was made and the skills of the engineer. However that being said the labels put out some bitchugly sounding CD's to get them out the door. Unfortunately I was one of those people who started buying CD's when they first came out and a lot of my classic rock reflects that.
I guess what really astonishes me is just how good some can sound to the point you hear things you never heard before and on the opposite scale how bad some sound making the listening experience unpleasant at best.
You used the words
Part A
"You used the words
Perfect now both questions have been DIRECTLY asked and DIRECTLY DODGED!
While you might feel that an "analog" coloration is more acceptable than a "digital" coloration (I'd agree as far as colorations go) they are both distortion of the original none the less. I've never heard a bird chirp or a real life acoustic guitar and thought to myself "Wow, is that ever "analog. "By your very own words you like
Geoff is quite the artful dodger, IMO of course.
Guess id better sell all my sacds and cds , go to ebay and buy a bunch of cassettes. wonder how the tape player would sound after the teleportation tweak?
what rubbish! i remember clearly the transition from tape to cd and I can remember thinking... man, thank god all that noise is gone! i had a dragon back then, nothing shabby.
ncdrawl-
I saw that on the website that he has linked in his user profile too (http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina60.htm). There was an editorial in Stereophile (http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/505awsi/index.html) in which Jim Austin called the Intelligent Chip, "obvious snake oil" (http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina62.htm). I bet those Intelligent Chips work equally well on cassettes and toasters too?
"While you might feel that an "analog" coloration is more acceptable than a "digital" coloration (I'd agree as far as colorations go) they are both distortion of the original none the less."
Again, you are distorting my statements. Surely you can do a little better than throw up these straw man arguments, eh? (See my comment below regarding logic refresher course.)
"By your very own words you like
"There was an editorial in Stereophile in which Jim Austin called the Intelligent Chip, "obvious snake oil."
Ouch!
"I bet those Intelligent Chips work equally well on cassettes and toasters too?"
Double Ouch!
Sorry GK. I've can't figure what you're trying to say here.
GK's answers are almost as enigmatic as his products.
which would be a Confucioun ouch.
A little off topic?
The CD vs. Cassette is totally irrelevant for me, as it would be impossible to find any of the music I listen to in any other format than CD.
I almost wish I wasn't an audiophile so I could still enjoy some of the crummy quality CDs I own
Speaking of CD quality and high end...
Many people claim that a CD copy sounds better than the original.
For how many generations is this true?
I just made a fifteenth generation copy and the copies keep sounding better and better. My many generation CD KOB copy just surpassed the SACD version, and I think around generation 34, it will have ecxeeded the vinyl LP version!
Weird how a copy can sound better than the original.
It doesn't sound any better. It sounds exactly the same. I tried this experiment on many players from the cheapest, the uber expensive. I also ran bit comparisons and there were no differences.
JSBach, I was acknowledging mrlowry's ref to Jim Austin's piece in Stereophile soundly bashing the Intelligent Chip, a fascinating little audio do-dad I happened to be involved with,,,,as Principal Staff Shill? :-) People bring up the "scathing" JA article from time to time to, uh, keep me in my place. :-)
FYI - The Intelligent Chip is the size of a camera's photo chip, about one inch square. With the chip sitting on top of the CD player's case, the CD to be treated is allowed to play for 2 seconds; the CD is then upgraded to sound like a remastered CD.
GK
"Many people claim that a CD copy sounds better than the original.
For how many generations is this true?
I just made a fifteenth generation copy and the copies keep sounding better and better. My many generation CD KOB copy just surpassed the SACD version, and I think around generation 34, it will have exceeded the vinyl LP version!
Weird how a copy can sound better than the original."
----------------------------
Geez, you really had me going there for a second. The giveaway was using KOB as the example. I mean, come on.... :-)
Yet again proving the importance of comb filtering, placebo effect, and expectation bias.
--Ethan
Remastered? What happens if you "treat" it for 5 seconds? Does the sound become that of the mastertape?
The actual time it takes for the complete treatment is 1/1000 second or less, after which time no more energy is spent, so no advantage to long treatments. The 2 seconds is an arbitrary number to ensure the CD laser has come on at least briefly and is more user friendly than, say, 1 second or 1/2 sec. The laser light actually comes on before the music starts to check some prelim data on disc. Better safe than sorry I always say...
Cheers
I don't agree that a pre-recorded tape sounds better, but man, I used to lust after a Dragon!! I always thought it was cool how Nak did auto-reverse! Saw it operate in an audio salon years ago.
Some pre-recorded tapes made on Chromium Dioxide still sound great to my (un-demanding?) ears but admittedly to get the best out of the Dragon, or similar deck, you need to make you own recordings on metal tape. I have a few made that way off 1/2 inch mastertapes and they are stunningly good.
The thing that astonishes me about my Dragon is that it's still running to original specification over 20 years after I bought it and it's never had any mechanical or electrical failure in all that time. When it went out of production I purchased a spare transport and head mechanism that's still sitting un-opened so the old Dragon looks like it's going to outlive me.
Per the three main topics of this discussion, only the OP seems genuine and not at all silly.
As far as "Intelligent Chips" I'm no stick in the mud, but BS is BS. And they are full of something, with BS seeming to be their main reason for being.
As far as the cassette and specifically the Nakamichi Dragon. First of all, there is no inherent reason the cassette is not a "high end" medium. The CD wasn't really ever a "high end" medium, but it was a valid improvement for most people and it was cheaper to manufacture, and you could fit 70 minutes of music on it. On high quality sets, such as those from Nakamichi, Pioneer, and NAD - cassettes are every bit high end, and very musical. With regard to the Dragon, it's not even the best Nak. For a real treat, listen to your cassettes on an older belt drive unit with discrete amplifiers rather than the later gear drive/IC based machines.
And quit being such a-holes. Seriously. Geez.
"As far as the cassette and specifically the Nakamichi Dragon. First of all, there is no inherent reason the cassette is not a "high end" medium. The CD wasn't really ever a "high end" medium..."
If you ever get a chance to heard the Nakamichi Dragon CD System (no longer produced) there's a high probability you'll change your perspective on CDs.
~ Cheers
I'm glad you used the past tense there otherwise I'd be delusional enjoying my Meridian 808.2 player.
Yes, but try and find one for sale in good condition. I gave up and stayed with the Dragon.
I wasn't aware anyone was being an arsehole on this thread. Maybe I'm guilty myself? I have been known to get out the flame thrower when having a fit of the nasties.
Of course there is, actually there are numerous reasons why cassette tape as originally designed for voice dictation cannot be considered a "high fidelity" recording or playback system.
Let's start with; incredibly slow real time tape speed resulting in horrible S/N rations which required substantial amounts of eq in recording and playback along with a limited dynamic range even when the best noise reduction and dr expansion circuits where applied, significant phase shift and distortion (most related to the eq and noise reduction circuits) at high and low frequencies, crosstalk between adjacent stereo channels which were placed on the edge of the tape where tape wear is most likely to occur and mistracking is always a problem, no real standards for production of the plastic cassette shell which housed the majority of the transport mechanics, an almost absolute reliance on the plastic cassette shell for a large portion of the cassette's success or failure, azimuth that varied from tape to tape and side to side of each tape and often within each side of the tape due to excessive amounts of tape skew, a pressure pad that couldn't be counted on to reliably hold the tape against the head, an erase/record/playback head arrangement originally designed for low quality voice dictation which made it impossible to accurately construct a three head design allowing real time tape monitoring of the actual recording with proper N/R circuitry applied, bias requirements that pushed the limits of the electronics, limited playback time unless you wanted to settle for much thinner tape which allowed more bleed through between adjacent layers of tape and a stretched tape after a few plays, excessive wow and flutter in most machines due to the reliance on the plastic cassette housing to supply most of the transport mechanics, a lack of standardization among tape manufacturers for the various formulations of oxide materials - most of which were far too abrasive and made the use of higher performance permalloy heads a quickly deteriorating issue of quality and the accceptance of low quality but longer lasting ferrite heads which had multiple problems at all frequencies, a lack of standardization among deck manufacturers for accurate eq for each tape type which meant tapes recorded on one machine might not playback properly on a different machine, a lack of cueing with accuracy along with difficulties in splicing the thin tape that wasn't easily cued to a specific spot, meters that were all but useless in most cases since they lacked calibration to the many formulations of tape, quick and dramatic overload while recording with a rapidly deteriorating frequency response and rise in distortion due to the slow real time tape speed and incredibly narrow 1/8" track width, a recording system that could only add noise, phase shift and distortion to any recording ...
etc.
Now, if none of those things bother you, then enjoy your cassette tapes. "Cassette" tape was a dictation system, plain and simple and incredibly low fi, which was made into a more convenient package than an LP and allowed the music industry to sell yet more copies of "The White Album" in various incarnations of short lived "enhanced" tape formulations and electronic manipulation schemes.
Since the days of wind up Victrolas, the music industry has embraced and the audio industry has supported a playback system that is more about the convenience of the media than about the quality of the media and more about selling more copies of "The White Album" than about actually improving the sonics of "The White Album". If this were not the case, we would all have 2", 30 i.p.s. open reel tape decks as our main source playing back second generation copies of "The White Album (artist's mix)" or we would still have sources that are "direct to disc" recordings like those old 78's.
What Nakamichi, Revox and Tandberg did - the last two bringing a tremendous amount of open reel tape history and know how along with them to the cassette market - was show that if you are willing to throw enormous amounts of money and technology at a problem, you can find an acceptable solution that satisfies a reasonable number of people when a substantial amount of the electronics and speakers of the day are insufficiently transparent to the quality of the signal they are fed.
Just goes to show how easy I am to please.
Anybody hear a fan of the sonics of Bruce Springsteen's "Nebraska?"
Me, too.
All that noise and distortion probably just makes 'em sound more like live concerts.
I never even noticed, really.. that album is just so effing good..... I have the nebraska demos...now that one sucks, sonically..but the final version, man it is so good..
thats what an amazing album does for me, makes me forget about the sonic imperfections...need to listen critically to it, I reckon.
I have only one word to describe this post, "incredible." Jan, take a bow you've earned it.
Yes, the cassette is a bit of a dancing bear thingie, it is amazing that it works as well as it does, and come to think of it, the CD, SACD, R2R, and the LP all fit under that umbrella. The cassette?.. simply moreso.
But it -IS- responsible for the existence of the song 'American Woman' by The Guess Who.
An audience member had a small portable single channel Philips cassette unit and was recording The Guess Who's stage show in a Bar, and recorded Burton Cummings Vocal noodling to Randy Bachman's Riff driven guitar warm-up, at the beginning of their show that given night. The kid brought the tape player backstage to show them his neat toy, Cummings and Bachman heard it - and the song "American Woman" was born.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oMeGu1MMaI&NR=1
This is the full version, which contains the idea of the original vocal and guitar noodling warm up from that night in the bar, as it originally happened.