> David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> Chow....
>
>
> Gone for a meal?
>
> Jerry
I suppose it's one of those cases where relying on one's ears is not
reliable. :-)
Richard Dobson
Reply by Jerry Avins●April 20, 20072007-04-20
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
...
> Chow....
Gone for a meal?
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by Andor●April 19, 20072007-04-19
Richard Dobson wrote:
...
> But at higher listening levels, with demanding content (percussion, cymbals,
> Richard Dobson one can definitely hear a certian hardness and edginess
> compared to my Denon system.
Hello Richard,
do you consider yourself "demanding content"?
:-)
Regards,
Andor
Reply by Randy Yates●April 18, 20072007-04-18
Richard Dobson <richarddobson@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> Randy Yates wrote:
>
>>> Might be a misprint for 1970's;
>> It might be. Then again, the author goes on to say that "early CD
>> players sounded
>> horrible." Well, their horrible was better than vinyl albums'
>> "good." Myself as well as everyone I demo'ed my first CD player to
>> in 1983
>> thought it was fantastic. My impression that it was close to hearing
>> the original analog master tapes. If that is horrible, then the mass
>> public had been listening to "worse than horrible" via vinyl for over
>> 20 years.
>> In short, there are too many errors and assertions of subjective
>> judgments in this article for me to seriously consider it.
>
> Looks like I'll have to read the paper then!
>
>
> I still have not an early CD player but a Sony PCM 601 converter,
> which still works amazingly well recording digitally onto VHS
> tapes. But at higher listening levels, with demanding content
> (percussion, cymbals,
> Richard Dobson one can definitely hear a certian hardness and edginess
> compared to my Denon system. "Horrible" is of course an OTT word, but
> this is just the way audio people prefer to express themselves, most
> of the time!
>
> Richard Dobson
One thing that's becoming clearer as I "mature" is that this sort of
talk is a sure sign of a cover-up, for if there truly was a
difference, the surest way to bring it to prominence would be to
objectively state the facts.
--
% Randy Yates % "I met someone who looks alot like you,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % she does the things you do,
%%% 919-577-9882 % but she is an IBM."
%%%% <yates@ieee.org> % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
Reply by Ron N.●April 18, 20072007-04-18
On Apr 18, 3:21 pm, Randy Yates <y...@ieee.org> wrote:
> Richard Dobson <richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> > Randy Yates wrote:
> > ..>According to:
> >>>http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/audio/Ultrasonics.htm
> >>>human brain electrical activity and regional cerebral blood flow
> >>>(rCBF)
> >>>were measured.
> >> Interesting that the first sentence of that article is in error:
> >> When the consumer audio Compact Disc (CD) was introduced in the
> >> late
> >> 1980s, ...
> >> The consumer audio Compact Disc was introduced in 1982. I owned one
> >> in 1983.
>
> > Might be a misprint for 1970's;
>
> It might be.
>
> Then again, the author goes on to say that "early CD players sounded
> horrible." Well, their horrible was better than vinyl albums' "good."
Where did the article say the comparison was against vinyl?
The paper seems to be from a university with at least two
world class concert halls (I heard Yo Yo Ma perform in one
of them recently).
IMHO. YMMV.
--
rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M
Reply by Richard Dobson●April 18, 20072007-04-18
Randy Yates wrote:
>>Might be a misprint for 1970's;
>
>
> It might be.
>
> Then again, the author goes on to say that "early CD players sounded
> horrible." Well, their horrible was better than vinyl albums' "good."
> Myself as well as everyone I demo'ed my first CD player to in 1983
> thought it was fantastic. My impression that it was close to hearing
> the original analog master tapes. If that is horrible, then the mass
> public had been listening to "worse than horrible" via vinyl for over
> 20 years.
>
> In short, there are too many errors and assertions of subjective
> judgments in this article for me to seriously consider it.
Looks like I'll have to read the paper then!
I still have not an early CD player but a Sony PCM 601 converter, which
still works amazingly well recording digitally onto VHS tapes. But at
higher listening levels, with demanding content (percussion, cymbals,
Richard Dobson one can definitely hear a certian hardness and edginess
compared to my Denon system. "Horrible" is of course an OTT word, but
this is just the way audio people prefer to express themselves, most of
the time!
Richard Dobson
Reply by Randy Yates●April 18, 20072007-04-18
Richard Dobson <richarddobson@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> Randy Yates wrote:
> ..>According to:
>>>http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/audio/Ultrasonics.htm
>>>human brain electrical activity and regional cerebral blood flow
>>>(rCBF)
>>>were measured.
>> Interesting that the first sentence of that article is in error:
>> When the consumer audio Compact Disc (CD) was introduced in the
>> late
>> 1980s, ...
>> The consumer audio Compact Disc was introduced in 1982. I owned one
>> in 1983.
>
> Might be a misprint for 1970's;
It might be.
Then again, the author goes on to say that "early CD players sounded
horrible." Well, their horrible was better than vinyl albums' "good."
Myself as well as everyone I demo'ed my first CD player to in 1983
thought it was fantastic. My impression that it was close to hearing
the original analog master tapes. If that is horrible, then the mass
public had been listening to "worse than horrible" via vinyl for over
20 years.
In short, there are too many errors and assertions of subjective
judgments in this article for me to seriously consider it.
--
% Randy Yates % "How's life on earth?
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % ... What is it worth?"
%%% 919-577-9882 % 'Mission (A World Record)',
%%%% <yates@ieee.org> % *A New World Record*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
Reply by Richard Dobson●April 18, 20072007-04-18
Randy Yates wrote:
..>According to:
>>http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/audio/Ultrasonics.htm
>>human brain electrical activity and regional cerebral blood flow
>>(rCBF)
>>were measured.
>
>
> Interesting that the first sentence of that article is in error:
>
> When the consumer audio Compact Disc (CD) was introduced in the late
> 1980s, ...
>
> The consumer audio Compact Disc was introduced in 1982. I owned one
> in 1983.
Might be a misprint for 1970's; the prototyes, at least, were around then:
http://www.oneoffcd.com/info/historycd.cfm
As so often with these things, the CD was trailed well before it reached
the high-streets. And of course the invention of it (James Russell)
dates back to 1965, or with rounding, the "late 1960's".
Richard Dobson
Reply by Randy Yates●April 18, 20072007-04-18
"Ron N." <rhnlogic@yahoo.com> writes:
> On Apr 18, 12:51 pm, Randy Yates <y...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> "Ron N." <rhnlo...@yahoo.com> writes:
>> > More current neurophysiological research on ultrasonic sound content
>> > shows that transient spectral components above 20 kHz can affect
>> > human brain response. e.g. someone may not be able to hear it
>> > directly, but it will affect their total listening experience.
>>
>> At what levels? Define "affect."
>
> According to:
> http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/audio/Ultrasonics.htm
> human brain electrical activity and regional cerebral blood flow
> (rCBF)
> were measured.
Interesting that the first sentence of that article is in error:
When the consumer audio Compact Disc (CD) was introduced in the late
1980s, ...
The consumer audio Compact Disc was introduced in 1982. I owned one
in 1983.
--
% Randy Yates % "My Shangri-la has gone away, fading like
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % the Beatles on 'Hey Jude'"
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% <yates@ieee.org> % 'Shangri-La', *A New World Record*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
Reply by Ron N.●April 18, 20072007-04-18
On Apr 18, 12:51 pm, Randy Yates <y...@ieee.org> wrote:
> "Ron N." <rhnlo...@yahoo.com> writes:
> > More current neurophysiological research on ultrasonic sound content
> > shows that transient spectral components above 20 kHz can affect
> > human brain response. e.g. someone may not be able to hear it
> > directly, but it will affect their total listening experience.
>
> At what levels? Define "affect."
> In other words, when listening to music at normal levels, is anything
> above 20 kHz going to significantly affect the listening experience?
If it affects the listeners brain, then whether it affects their
"experience" becomes an interesting philosophical question,
not a DSP question.
> If so, have there been ABX tests performed that show statistical
> significance?
If you have access to the Journal of Neurophysiology (I don't),
then you could check the details of the various experiments.
IMHO. YMMV.
--
rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M