Altmann Tera Player - Page 48  

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodvibes 

Well, since the 16/44 has less dynamic range, in theory, you would increase the level for better distortion and noise character since the dynamic headroom is not needed. Gain is not really a qualitative difference. You can actually see the finer ladder structure of HiDef with enough zoom on mastering programs but that is also not indicative of better. I think HiDef is better because my ears tell me so when used in good kit, not because of any of the #s or pictures some need. It's not my eyes that I'm trying to convince.

Same. In the end the people scrutinizing on this will never really have the kind of enjoyment we have because they don't trust themselves and trust a piece of paper to tell them what they can and cannot hear. As you said they are listening with their eyes lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicday 

Thank you all your kind impressions and all been saind about the Tera Player. And i would like to thank Adrian( Ampussen ) for meeting me so i can try his TP with my W4R wich was brilliant.

I want to say that i have owned DX100, and was not happy with it per total, but the Tera Player is eaxctley what i was after,and the SQ is the best for me.

P.S. i just been ''scammed'' by this kind and nice Mr.Charles wich has answered all my questions.

My TP is in the making and can't wait to get it.

I am glad that you found it useful.  Thank you for me providing some nourishment.

Ade

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodvibes 

I have and it's meh at best next to a really good turntable setup as well though finding a really good table setup is even more difficult. Would I take said CD player over a squeezebox touch doing HiDef? In a NY minute LOL but when you're comparing to a $30k CD player perhaps you need a 20K turntable setup or streamer. Perhaps you haven't heard a comparable HiRes or analog setup. I am extremely familiar with $20-30k CD players, Nagra professional recorders, both analog and digital and computer audio/mixing with things like Weiss interfaces etc. I don't like computers as source and feel there's better solutions in (dedicated) streaming but they're great tools.

 

I'm not familiar with professional equipment, only with consumer products so I will accept that I need to expand my listening scope to include more HiDef material and playback equipment (pro stuff?) since it seems there may be more quality there than what I have heard to date. Questions is also whether I can find the material I like! Not easy to live on the edge, so costly and takes so much time especially if this is only a hobby!

I agree that vinyl has come a long way having used in the '80s the LP12, Ittok, Supex (Apart from cartridge changes, I'm still using it today after 30 years!). It's mid-fi now but the satisfaction the Linn set gave me then is difficult to repeat now! The Tera Player reminds me of that, the discovery of a device that sounds so good, a device you can't stop listening to, rediscovering my collection of music, hearing detail that I didn't notice before. Just like the Linn was back then. The TP isn't cheap but if it lasts as long... ?!

An architect noticed the TP the other day and said "woah, how retro, like from the war". Built like a Sherman tank I said. 

This is Charles Altamann the guy behind the Tera Player.I hope he doesn't mind having his photo here, but more people need to listen to it first before they judge his hard work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by skamp 


No. CD audio is (full) 16-bit. I don't know where you got that idea.
12 bit would mean that the lower 4 bits would be set to zero. They're not. And they're not some kind of error correction data or whatever: only PCM data gets ripped and reaches the DAC (anything else would just be noise).
Edit: unless you're talking about the dynamic range of recorded music. LossyWAV reduces PCM data to 10-13 bits with the standard quality setting, while keeping transparency. But that applies to all recorded music: 24 bit music doesn't have more dynamic range than CDs.

Here you go. http://makbit.com/articles/cd-overview.pdf

Sequence:

Sync + Control & Display + 12 Data + 4 Error Handling + 12 Data + 4 Error handling. Basically 72 DB of dynamic range that can be bumped to about 80db with proper dither.

24 bit has twice that (144db) to allow a wider divergence of loud vs quiet. Whether you can gain ride 16 bit up a bit will vary by recording and limiting etc. If you feel it's meaningful enough of a difference to worry about is another matter entirely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodvibes 

Quote:

Here you go. http://makbit.com/articles/cd-overview.pdf

Sequence:

Sync + Control & Display + 12 Data + 4 Error Handling + 12 Data + 4 Error handling

 

Of course 24 bit has more dynamic range because it has a lower noise floor to allow a wider divergence of loud vs quite. Whether you can gain ride 16 bit up a bit will vary by recording and limiting etc. If you feel it's meaningful enough of a difference to worry about is another matter entirely.

Remember goodvibes Skamp is the know-it-all. He is infallible ;).

With expensive, near bespoke players such as this often the only way someone can make an informed choice is via threads like this as there is no way to audition one! A 16bit player with no screen and a cheap case with a sticker denoting controls, at that price, is a leap of faith and would need to sound astonishing to convince me of its value for money! There needs to be objective evidence as well as subjective opinion. I can see absolutely no reason for not publishing test measurements for your products, after all if it measures well it will not harm sales.

Quote:

Originally Posted by skamp 


No. CD audio is (full) 16-bit. I don't know where you got that idea.
12 bit would mean that the lower 4 bits would be set to zero. They're not. And they're not some kind of error correction data or whatever: only PCM data gets ripped and reaches the DAC (anything else would just be noise).
Edit: unless you're talking about the dynamic range of recorded music. LossyWAV reduces PCM data to 10-13 bits with the standard quality setting, while keeping transparency. But that applies to all recorded music: 24 bit music doesn't have more dynamic range than CDs.

In use CD achieves just under 90 db of dynamic range which should be plenty but the actual data bits amount to about 12. http://makbit.com/articles/cd-overview.pdf

24 bit has 144 db of dynamic range so there is a huge technical difference to 16. Whether it allows you gain to ride the 16 bit up a bit will have to do with the recording, limiting etc. Whether those numbers are musically important is besides the point but consider this. In digital you record at a lower levels to protect from overload as you run out of bits it makes a horrible sound. A limiter can be used but you don't want to hit those much.

As opposed to analog, in digital, distortion goes up as signal level goes down. May have something to do with some not finding small musical and ambient cues as good in 16 bit vs analog and HiDef. Measuring digital as though it were analog is a huge mistake and assumptive as to what's important, brought on by an analog mind set.

It's interesting that the dynamic digital floor is considered enhanced by adding noise yet the analog noise floor is considered fixed even though you can hear into it. It's weighting and bias driven by early marketing of the CD format, of which both recording and playback has improved markedly over 3 decades but how could that be? It was perfect to begin with. Just another example of how we don't always know what we don't know until we do.

 This is interesting as well. http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/dynamic-comparison-of-lps-vs-cds-part-4/dynamic-comparison-of-lps-vs-cds-part-4-page-2

Your right and I got caught up in that from another thread. I don't find 16 bit as good as hidef or analog so it's not important to the sound discussion but the correction is important so thanks. I agree that mistakes should be pointed out and corrected. I recalled from the early days of CD that they didn't achieve more than about 12 in practice but apparently it wasn't a format thing and related to the kit of the day. I definitely skimmed and read into that link.  Sorry to make you do that post but glad it got caught.

Just got a hold of this little thing..

impression: this thing sounds like a $700ish desktop dac perhaps.. definitely better in technicality and musicality than my CA dacmagic. the music is just flowing, very black background, very neutral sounding. this little thing is standing way above my $400 CA dacmagic as a standalone dac. impressive..

but i still can't overlook the lack of screen over the beautiful sound of this sweet little thing. plus the packaging is just pure rubbish, $1100 wav player with nothing but plain carton as its box? no extra goodies or accessories? you gotta be kidding me!

I'd be fine with everything about it except the navagation. I like HiDef but I don't think it's the biggest factor in DAP goodness and have said I don't think it's needed here. Of course, at this price, that and a screen would be nice, LOL.

It would be nice to have accesories inludded in the package, but i have to say that i care about is the sound!.

IMO i have to say that i trully apreciate the build quality and the simplicity of this DAP.The design is smart and ergonomic.Not even a power/on/off button everything is so simple in the name of music.

Maybe the people can't belive that the Tera Player can delivery such an amazing sound, becouse is so small?