HOLY sh*t (by Bill Evans)

[manisandher]

Peter, just a very quick thought. Are you sure that the XXHE attenuator isn't doing something strange when Arc Prediction is NOT engaged?

Mani.

[PeterSt]

Well, I can't be 100% sure. All I know is that I measure at -0dBFS and that that looks fine. I regularly measure at lower levels too, and nothing changes (except for the expected decrease in THD figures). The combination you pose however, is one I wouldn't use often. Or maybe never.

What I do know, is that the other day I found problems in the native playback of 96KHz Hires, which I found by playing normal music during looking at the analyser. In 192Khz the problem would be there just the same, but I can't see that through the analyser (which samples at 192 itself, and the anomalies can only be seen beyond the sample rate -> thus can't be seen). So, that one was solved theoretically.

BUT

This was solved only weeks ago, and as far as I'm concerned you don't have that version (I didn't put it up yet).
This all would mean that you must be correct in your finding, although at this moment I don't see the relation to the volume.

And after some thinking ... What happened with this bug is that you'd have about half of the high frequency output. Well, *that* would be dull ...

But but but again ...
I can't imagine (but maybe forgot) that this was about "normal" HiRes output. So, all I recall is that this is about the output for the NOS1, which brings me to the question : did you switch off the "Is Phasure NOS1 384" setting ? I guess you must have, or otherwise there will be one channel output.

For now, at indeed using XXHE, your only good option is to use Arc Prediction again, and output 384 ... ehm ... which you can't use at the other end.
Haha. Oops.
I will look into the solution of this bug again, and let you know to whom or what is applies.

Peter

[Nick]

If I were you I would not buy the Hires version. I will be back later about this ...

Too late! But I wanted to compare the hires with the CD version you have anyway. I've just ordered the CD so haven't been able to listen to it yet. But even when it arrives, I won't have a NOS1 up and running, so I'm not sure if I'll be listening to it in its full glory.

But for now, the hires sounds very good through the PM2. BUT I discovered something that I think I will now need to look into further:

I downloaded the hires from HDTracks last night and wanted to listen to it. But it was late, and I didn't want to disturb my wife who was sleeping in the living room next door. So I switched on the Berning Siegfried amp and listened to the album through my AKG K-1000 headphones (I haven't used the Berning/AKG combo for months and months). I'm not meaning to 'show off' here, I just want to make it clear that the replay chain was about as transparent as I've ever heard. Now, the Berning has a built-in volume pot, so I set XXHE to -0dB and listened. The piano sounded so sweet. The bass just right. Yes, way too much audience noise, but otherwise very nice. And then I thought I'd try it with XXHE set to -3dB and the Berning pot increased just a little. The sound was pretty much destroyed. Dull, dull, dull. All the sweetness was gone.

I'm going to explore this further...

Mani.

Mani,

Your about note dul sound is interesting.
I don’t have the transparency of a very good head phone setup but I think might have something like this as well.

Generally I can’t play direct to amp without pre-amp at the moment, so I use XX at 0db vol and an in amp volume control to set my listening levels. Quite a lot of the time I have to limit the output from my NOS1, so in order to do this I set XX volume to -3 to -6 db to reduce output signal levels.  With XX at -3 to -6 db I also seem to have the dul sound. I would say dynamics drop markedly and performance becomes quite flat.

There could well be other factors in my system that might be contributing to this, however the difference is quite noticeable and is present with both NOS1 alone and NOS1 => SPDIF => AN4 DAC replay chains. The TVC volume control in my amp does not really change the characteristic of sound at +- 6db levels.

I put this effect down to signal compression caused by -3 to -6 db of XX attenuation so never thought to mention the change in sound. But reading your note I though I would replay these experiences just in case it’s of any use to Peter.

I’ll do some experiments with / without arc prediction and peak extend etc.

Regards,

Nick.

[Nick]

Mani,

Your about note dul sound is interesting.
I don’t have the transparency of a very good head phone setup but I think might have something like this as well.

Generally I can’t play direct to amp without pre-amp at the moment, so I use XX at 0db vol and an in amp volume control to set my listening levels. Quite a lot of the time I have to limit the output from my NOS1, so in order to do this I set XX volume to -3 to -6 db to reduce output signal levels.  With XX at -3 to -6 db I also seem to have the dul sound. I would say dynamics drop markedly and performance becomes quite flat.

There could well be other factors in my system that might be contributing to this, however the difference is quite noticeable and is present with both NOS1 alone and NOS1 => SPDIF => AN4 DAC replay chains. The TVC volume control in my amp does not really change the characteristic of sound at +- 6db levels.

I put this effect down to signal compression caused by -3 to -6 db of XX attenuation so never thought to mention the change in sound. But reading your note I though I would replay these experiences just in case it’s of any use to Peter.

I’ll do some experiments with / without arc prediction and peak extend etc.

Regards,

Nick.

Update

I should have siad the above is with 44.1khz material with 8X arc prediction playing through the NOS1 and 4X arc prediction playing via NOS1 SPDIF in to the AN4 DAC.

Perhaps this is just attenuation compression ?

Nick.

[manisandher]

I don’t have the transparency of a very good head phone setup but I think might have something like this as well.

Hi Nick, looking at your signature, I'm sure your system is one of the more transparent ones out there. And I suspect a TVC is one of the better ways of attenuating in the analogue domain. In any event, I'm very interested to hear what you find, especially as you have both a NOS1 and an AN DAC to hand.

Interestingly, I've never even tried feeding the NOS1 into my Berning/AKG combo, but I certainly will when I get my two NOS1s back from their upgrade (though this may be quite a while off yet). I've always said that recreating the Berning/AKG sound via speakers is what I'm striving for. Having had a good listen last night and early this morning, albeit with the 'poor old' PM2, I realise how far away I still am from getting the sound I want from speakers. There is a clarity but more so a sweetness to the sound that I don't think I've ever heard reproduced through any speakers. Well, I have a few weeks before work kicks off again and may just reignite the quest.

Mani.

[Flecko]

After all audiophiles don't listen to er, say Black Sabbath, or Rap master so-and-so

Yes I am sure nobody of us do

With XX at -3 to -6 db I also seem to have the dul sound. I would say dynamics drop markedly and performance becomes quite flat.

I made tests with digital volume too and found, that my passive pre amp sounded better than the digital volume control. Ok, my dac is not made for a direct connection to the amp but anyway, that is what I have experienced with different dacs. Also the ones with low output impedance. Some weeks ago, I was out buying a new Preamplifier. It is no longer passive but a hibrid of tubes and burr brown output buffer. This was the most significant improvement in sound ever. Not exaggerating. I was shocked about how dynamical it can sound. And the bass...

[AlainGr]

Hi Peter,

I do not have the chance of having the 16/44 version of the album. Which one would you recommend ? I am very curious about theses differences. I still have a lot of things to learn.

Here are some thoughts:
- Is the resolution up to a point where some micro-informations are "too much" for a recording from 1961 ? I am quite sure that the microphones from that time were not as accurate and silent as those of today ?
- Maybe the master tapes are not in such good shape as the 16/44 version ?
- If you write to the engineer, maybe he will give some answers as for the conclusions you have ?

Each time I think I get it, I realize that there is something new I have to take in account...

Thanks,

Alain

[PeterSt]

My kind of pretentious ideas about this :

Higher resolution mics may not be needed at all. Good ones are. Maybe lower resolution are better in other things ?

Better dynamics seem key always. This includes the obvious "no compression".  So, this shows from older digital transfers in the first place. But, going back further thee general better dynamics start to add ? This by itself includes less diginal manipulation. And this latter again shows best when looking at HiRes. Mind you, what we can see as anomalies in HiRes, we can't see (yet) in Redbook. But there too similar things will be happening.

Of course the master tapes from back then have deteriorated by now. More or less, but they will have.

Write to the engineer ... I don't know. From the theoretical POV I can't know better. Still it is my perception that it needs a great deal of digital knowledge, and then I'm not talking about what to do with ProTools etc. Merely what causes which, like the examples Adrian (Flecko) gave.
There is more and more to it, the longer we think about it (and collect experiences). For example, you can make a R2R deck capture 35Khz from tape, but all you would be doing is capturing additional noise. Noise that would be there in another fashion when left alone (say, now 15KHz is possible), and the next thing what happens is that a denoiser has to come in. There are so (so) many stages than one has to put both feet on the ground and sit back again - and start all over because somewhere in the process a wrong decision has been taken.

For the first time in many years I was today able to at last reason out why 16/44.1 *theoretically* can be better than any HiRes. But theory can just turn out to be practice; it may take some more time to really proove it. It goes into all kind of "laws" built up over the last decades, and as so often, it takes some other anomaly to occur somewhere to let one think differently. Or at least I do, as that I am able to let occur anomalies (because of making mistakes). But then I think ... I think what is actually happening, and from there I build up.
Ok, I'm not saying that I will be better than anyone else, but I do say that I put infinite time into these things. Maybe because I think I have that time. Not everybody has that. Sure not everybody owns the combination of being into software, hardware like a DAC, audio which is a huge subject by itself, and also felt the need to make programs and products out of that. I may be the only one doing this all, and so I may be the only one being able to judge across boundaries.

This doesn't tell at all that I know how microphones from the past work. So yes, my guts tell me it must be worse than toay's, but instead of taking that for granted, I try to find why that is apparently not important at all. So, something else must be going on.
It is not much different than the Hires story from the past few years. I heard it was wrong, and it took two years to find the reason why. Well, it just *is* all wrong; at least all the DVD-A stuff is, and most probably SACD is no different.
Today it even goes further, because today it looks like I'm prooving that even today's HiRes will be wrong. Against all odds that is, but still along with my ears.

If we go one step further, we will all be back at the turntables. But this again would be a wrong decision, because long gone it has been proven that capturing from vinyl leads to a digital result which won't differentiate from the vinyl playback (hi Mani). And so it is the other way around : how to play back the digital results from the recording companies that it will be "analogue". Well, it seems it can't. But it also seems that the recordings are sh*t all over. But not those from back then ...

Currently I am just strolling to all the 1961's one by one, and they keep on working without exception. Ok, not 100% true, because there's some mono in there as well, which seems to go along with less quality. Hard to judge, because mono creates false harmonics, at least in my room here. But the Miles Davis I stumbled over ... you see the man swing the trumpet from left to right.
It is a completely different experience.

Peter

[PeterSt]

Guys, for sure I will be looking into the volume thing ...

[christoffe01]

Oh well, it looks like I'm buying the 24/192 version from HDTracks
Mani.

There is an interesting article about hires downloads in the "hi-finews" on June 2011, page 14 to 18.

Most of the tested hires downloads of older records are upsampled, and therefore not worth ................... .

Joachim

[manisandher]

I haven't read the article (stopped buying hifi magazines a long, long time ago pretty much after I read a review on the then new Marantz SA-1 which proclaimed it was the best SACD and CD player on the planet - I bought the SA-1 and totally disagreed with the reviewer... and hated the sound of SACD... still do). Did you see the rebuttal by HDTT (http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/page/20/Response-to-Upsampling)?

Mani.

[TimDH]

Peter,
I'm not following the volume thing completely.  What happens if you play 24/96 through XXHighEnd with Arc Prediction into the NOS1?  Any problems on the HF when you attenuation using XX in that case?

Thanks!

[christoffe01]

(http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/page/20/Response-to-Upsamling

Did you see the rebuttal by HDTT (http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/page/20/Response-to-Upsampling)?

please see:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Look-what-Linn-sold-2496

Linn confirmes the finding and HD Tracks removed the file (a Peter Frampton CD) from their website.

The music downloads are the future business in music distribution and I'm quite shure that some ................. .
On RHINO they are selling files (not hires) directly recorded from a LP. You can hear the "touch down" of the stylus in the groove.

Joachim

[PeterSt]

Hey Tim,

As far as I know there isn't a problem with the digital attenuation anywhere, but since people report perceived problems I'm always prepared to listen and dive into the matter. That is really all (ehm, for now ).

About playing HiRes through the NOS1 in general, it is to be taken that with the current XXHighEnd version even the HiRes needs Arc Prediction filtering. This is because there is a bug in the native playback of HiRes (probably only 88.2/96KHz but maybe also 176.4/192KHz).
This bug has been solved on my side already, but the version of this is (0.9z-6) is not up yet.

Btw, a small tad earlier version of XXHighEnd onto the NOS1 even played 88.2/96 in slomotion. This hasn't been reported by anyone, and had been in there for many months. Maybe people don't feel the need to report such a thing, but it is more probable that the output rate is always set to 352.8/384, which is exactly what I do. Then -here too- there is/was no problem.

But as said, I must look into that volume thing ...
Peter

[PeterSt]

Hi Joachim and all,

I can tell you, there is much (much) more to it than simply making a graph and point at it as no HiRes. Of course I'm not talking about "vinyl rips", and of course I am not saying that all is fine (hey, the most contrary). But for example that CA post you pointed at ... probably nothing is wrong with it. Remember, my view. But, I'm also two years longer into this than anyone else (I think).

It really needs experience to read those graphs, and sometimes it needs other measurement means to look deeper.

Fact is and remains that all what can be proven to originate from a multi channel recording, is already flawed because of the 2ch downmix in there. Not only because the downmix can't be done right, but also because it comes with its unavoidable technical anomalies.
This is why I say that when you find older (DVD-A) 192Khz recordings, you're quite on the safe side, because these won't have come along wilt multi channel recordings. Of course, unless that is upsampled stuff (which happens too).

The whole point is : nobody seems to know what he is or was doing, and I guess it needs "us" to point that out in the modern era. This is not about hoaxing, but plainly about not having a clue about what is right and what is wrong (and THUS all is wrong).

I'd even say that HDTracks provides a LOT of help to get hold of the truth about this all, just because each other day they upload a new DVD-A version which only subsequently prooves that it is the exact same as I already have here for over two years. But then -as already said- this is about poor productions, and most of the time not about upsampling or anything.

Hey, it already seems difficult for nearly everybody to recognize that any older taped stuff impossibly can contain higher frequencies because they just weren't in there. And because of this misjudgement in the first place, people judge 40KHz frequencies as very good, not having a clue about that being aliases of poor filtering after poor downmixing.

Funnily enough I think I have been the only one always (ok, two years or so) saying that HiRes s*cks all over, just because it doesn't sound good at all. But, now the whole world starts to use stuff like AudaCity, and because of too few knowledge all kind of indeed accusations are fastly spread through the net. One would say that I have my right at last, but actually the contrary happens from what I intend with it. I mean, why to accuse the better companies from providing falsifications just because "we" don't understand. The problem here is : these accusations are about today's remasters from (old) tapes, even up to real HiRes today's recordings. I too can complain about those, but then in the area of the Bill Evans like in this topic. This is quite different from something being a hoax ...

And still *I* must be very careful about not making mistakes (as the loudest shouter and bringer of bad news in this area).

Peter


PS: Alain too IMHO made a small mistake by calling Machine Head a downmix. The stupid thing here is : This album is very OK on the technical aspects. No anomalies to be seen. Why ? well, because it was NOT created as a downmix.
... But now it is a strange compliation of something like the two front channels in a 5.1 setup. That too doesn't work. There's just no way out for the 5.1 DVD-A stuff ...