[gregorio]

   
[1] Because he doesn't answer with real technical information.
 
[2] I believe A+ and EQ are separated features. But it could be some sort of equalization with A+. [3] The engineer told me A+ will fill the "original data" into sample to make the block closer to perfect sine wave. [4] I think his explanation is similar to dithering where you fill noise to improve sine wave form.

 
1. Yes he does! It's just incomplete, sometimes vague and often incorrect.
 
2. Have you read the linked documentation in the article you quoted?
 
3. Exactly my point! Accepting the marketing BS of what you were "told" demonstrates extreme gullibility and a complete ignorance of digital audio. In digital audio, the samples already contain ALL the "original data" required to make/reconstruct a perfect sine wave. This is basic digital audio 101! As there is therefore nothing to "fill",  A+ must, by definition, BE DOING NOTHING! To support this; if A+ were doing something, the only thing it can be doing is distorting that sine wave but they explicitly state this is not occurring!: "In 1985, audio designer Mark Levinson created the legendary Cello Audio Palette, the world’s first sonically transparent tone control system. The Cello Audio Palette is today the most expensive and rare audio component, prized for its ability to fine tune the sound with no distortion or noise. Master Class offers the same capability in the digital domain..." He also states that when switching A+ on and off; "The change is very subtle and many people will not hear it immediately, but the listening experience is not the same." Which is also absolutely consistent with what one would expect of any marketable feature (IE. A+) which actually does nothing at all!
 
4. It's not even vaguely similar to dithering, he effectively explains the software as just an EQ (or more precisely, as an EQ plus a placebo function). He explains ONLY what it's EQ capabilities are and even advises how to set it as an EQ. Although completely unrelated, dithering is NOT filling in with "noise to improve the sine wave form"! How could filling with noise improve a sine wave anyway?
 
G

 

[VNandor]

Sorry for the dumb question but what is this remastering tool again? Is it like a DSP? I mean some digital signal goes in and then a different signal comes out after the processing?
 
 

   
He claimed it will improve sound quality by filling the gap between digital block with the original data for more analog sound.

Okay... so let's say there's a signal with 48kHz sampling rate. The remastering tool then adds let's just say a single sample between every two original samples. Is it what it does? Because if that happens then the signal that has been created by the remastering tool will have to be played back at a 96kHz sampling rate. That sounds like upsampling.

 

[watchnerd]

  Sorry for the dumb question but what is this remastering tool again? Is it like a DSP? I mean some digital signal goes in and then a different signal comes out after the processing?

 
It's nothing of importance and not a standard mastering tool by any means.
 
It's just some guy's 6 band software based graphic EQ who is trying to market it with claims to the Cello Palette, which is itself an obsolete analog HW product for anyone who does DAW-based editing and mastering, AKA almost everyone.
 
If Windows X wants more details, he should ask the maker.
 
If the maker gives unsatisfactory answers, either ask again for clarification or conclude that it's all BS if the maker won't explain.

 

[spruce music]

Sounds like it upsamples and does EQ.

 

[watchnerd]

Sounds like it upsamples and does EQ.

 
Definitely on the EQ. Maybe on the upsampling.
 
If both, there are dozens of ways to do the same in software.
 
Nothing worth wasting intellectual firepower over here.  
 
Once again we have a vague claim by an audio vendor that doesn't make technical sense and/or is fuzzy. We could spend our lives trying to "reverse engineer" fanciful claims; instead we should just recognize them for what they are.

 

[Brooko]

[Mod Comment]
 
Hi guys.  Removed some content already. Just a little reminder .....
 

• Keep it on topic
• Lets remove the accusations of trolling.  If you don't want to respond - then don't be part of the thread.  Its your choice to participate or not.
• Windows X - instead of always asking others to do the objective tests - how about you do it?  Then present your results. Just asking a question - then debating when others with more knowledge reply is not exactly conclusive to a good discussion.
• Greg - great replies so far (factual and objective).  Again though - make sure we're addressing the point and not the person (I know its hard sometimes)
• Everyone - lets all keep the personal stuff out of it OK - that way there is less to clean up and less reports/flags.

 

[WindowsX]

  [Mod Comment]
 
Hi guys.  Removed some content already. Just a little reminder .....
 

• Keep it on topic
• Lets remove the accusations of trolling.  If you don't want to respond - then don't be part of the thread.  Its your choice to participate or not.
• Windows X - instead of always asking others to do the objective tests - how about you do it?  Then present your results. Just asking a question - then debating when others with more knowledge reply is not exactly conclusive to a good discussion.
• Greg - great replies so far (factual and objective).  Again though - make sure we're addressing the point and not the person (I know its hard sometimes)
• Everyone - lets all keep the personal stuff out of it OK - that way there is less to clean up and less reports/flags.

 
I think you missed the point here. I already did some research, even talked with founder and engineers myself but they didn't provide me enough factual values. So I asked people in here for more information. Are you suggesting that this sub-forum isn't a good place to ask such question anymore?
 
I'll talk nicely to everyone who makes soundly discussion. You can see my replies to greg whom I'm always in bad terms with that it can sound positive sometimes. Well, you already removed that part but I hope you already read it.
 
So far I learned most people here believe A+ is equalizer process. If definition of equalizer is changing band of frequencies alone, I don't think A+ will do that. What I'm aware is it's some sort of DSP manipulating data but couldn't find concrete information about how it works. I read from paper and reviews but still no avail too.
 
https://www.danielhertz.com/images/pdf/dh_master_class_user_guide_v103.pdf
https://www.danielhertz.com/images/pdf/Daniel-Hertz-Master-Class-announcement.pdf
http://www.monoandstereo.com/2014/06/daniel-hertz-master-class-review.html
 
A+ seems to work differently from EQ in user guide but none provided any useful information to conclude as we all agreed here.

 

[castleofargh]

 that's what I find strange. some dude comes up with claims about a tech and no clear data about anything. you'll have hundred if not thousand of those each year. my typical reaction is that I don't care. the guy can come talking to me when he has something to show. the end.
but here you are, with a all lot of nothing, even direct contact with the guys doesn't give much, if any, relevant information, yet you still want to know more.

 

[watchnerd]

   
 Are you suggesting that this sub-forum isn't a good place to ask such question anymore?
 

 
I don't think it matters what sub-forum it is.
 
You're basically asking about inner workings of this software.
 
Which the maker won't tell you.  And we can't know with any certainty.  The best we can do is make wild guesses.
 
I think we gave you the first pass answer:
 
It appears to be (an expensive) 6-band software-based graphic equalizer.  The other claims made about filling the gaps in PCM are technobabble nonsense which have no engineering meaning.
 
What else do you want us to say or do?

 

[VNandor]

I think I'm completely missing the point. Are we supposed to try to reverse engineer this A+ software and then post how we did it or what???

 

[watchnerd]

  I think I'm completely missing the point. Are we supposed to try to reverse engineer this A+ software and then post how we did it or what???

 
Perhaps....maybe Windows X is looking to make a competing product?

 

[spruce music]

   
Perhaps....maybe Windows X is looking to make a competing product?

You mean like AAA+ Frequency improver.  Provides additional frequencies to overcome the typically threadbare sound of conventional hifi.  The user can adjust the density of frequencies employed and where to employ them for best sonic effect. 

 

[spruce music]

Why not inquire with these people as instructed in the user's guide.
 
techsupport
@danielhertz.com

 

[VNandor]

   
Perhaps....maybe Windows X is looking to make a competing product?

I was being serious. As strange as it sounds, I like discussing things, this is why I'm on this forum. The problem is, I don't know what to discuss here? Looking at Audio Palette, it seems to have EQ knobs, you can add panning if you want (with the left/right input knobs I assume), a phase control knob so you can "fix the phase of the recording" (no idea why but it has it). And then we have that mysterious "it fills the blank between samples for a more analog sound"-claim... You won't get more useful information by upsampling that one is for sure. So it looks pretty basic stuff to me so far, I could do all that if I wanted to, with audacity for example.

 

[Brooko]

   
I think you missed the point here. I already did some research, even talked with founder and engineers myself but they didn't provide me enough factual values. So I asked people in here for more information. Are you suggesting that this sub-forum isn't a good place to ask such question anymore?
 

 
I'm pretty sure I missed no point - you definitely missed mine though.  You asked questions about what you read - but you seem to be taking what they've said as gospel.  When things are pointed out to you - and examples given (discussion about SACD etc) - you immediately ask for data.  But you don't seem keen to supply any forms of testing yourself.  It is the responsibility of the person making the claim to back up any assertions.  As soon as people start talking about tests on these forums - you tend to run and hide, and the techno-babble comes out.
 
Produce objective data - that is all that is being asked.
 
And you already have the contacts - so why don't you take the comments from this forum and ask the makers their thoughts on what has been discussed so far.  If they are that eager to back up the talk beyond "marketing speak" we may get some interesting answers