[greggf]

In the current print edition of STEREOPHILE magazine, reviewer Fred Kaplan reviews the Krell Evolution 505 CD/SACD player.

He says that during the review process, Krell updated his unit's "anti-jitter circuitry," and that afterwards he could "immediately hear an improvement. Everything sounded more coherent." "I could hear more counterpoint," he says, between string sections in a Gorecki. "Bass ... was also improved... it sounded both deeper and tighter..."

"In general," he continues, "music became more intricate and lively with the new anti-jitter circuit."

My question is, is this nonsense? Is it even possible? Could Krell's $10,000 player have shipped with such a faulty anti-jitter set-up that the change would be that audible?

What does this say about Fred Kaplan? About STEREOPHILE?

It reminds me of the time that Art Dudley claimed that he could hear an audible improvement by turning off a cdp's display. Are these "improvements" possible to hear?!

 

[Lazarus Short]

Yeah, and J-10 used to claim that he could "hear" a difference, depending on the number and positioning of objects (usually ebony pucks) placed on top of a component's case. Gush, gush, gush. I no longer read that rag.

Laz

 

[progo]

Well, how do you know if he didn't hear them? These minimal, if not nonexisting differences certainly can be hard to believe (and hear!).

Many things can happen if some circuitry is badly done. That way it can be possible that a backlight on a screen affects some components. Of course, there is no sensible difference if the circuitry is good.

 

[majkel]

I stopped reading such magazines many years ago but to your suprise - things that guy wrote might be true. I know the improvement that appeared after upgrading the clock in my CDP's transport. All that Kaplan wrote is that the primary clock circuitry was a bit faulty and instable. After that Krell fixed the issue.

 

[Vic Trola]

All:

Cannot comment on the Krell, but it looks like Fred may have gotten this one right.

Jitter smears the sound stage, constricts dynamics and rolls off the low end. The correction he describes is exactly what would happen if excessive jitter is eliminated. Viz., the sound become coherent, instruments are easily pointed out in space. Top hate symbols and snare drums are not tingy or mushy. Vocalists are easily separated from the sound stage. Bass drums have attack and an extended low end.

A good DAC or CD player re-clocks the digital signal and syncs it with its internal clock. While it may not be eliminated, jitter's sonic shenanigans are appreciably reduced.

Ironically, too much upsampling can produce an effect similar to that of excessive jitter. A good test for too much upsampling is listening to a bass drum. When the drum sounds extended and you can hear the attack, you have the right sampling rate. And not to discourage you upsampling fans, sometimes its just 44.1 - yikes..

 

[majkel]

Vic Trola, thanks for a valuable post!

I agree with you completely. After upgrading the oscillator in my CDP I added some capacitors to match "better" the new crystal, and to my surprise sound got thinner, lighter with lesser body and timbre. I removed them and then I found out the capacitances were optimal from start, the sounds got fuller, more colorful, with body and spatial stability. The same "thinning" result I heard when connecting external DAC using crappy coaxial cable. When switched to a better one (silver NeoTech) it sounded like clock upgrade.
I didn't know about the upsampling issue but was listening to a hi-end headphone rig last Friday, built on Cairn Fog v.2 CD player which uses CS4392 and AD1892 upsampling chip. Everything sounded great - timbre, dynamics, clarity but the imaging and soundstage were somehow corrupted - like invisible barrier in front of you, from behind which all the music starts. Second effect was blurry, imprecise imaging. I couldn't "lock" my hearing in one position to focus on a certain instrument. Maybe bypassing the upsampler would be a good step?

 

[tfarney]

Quote:

My question is, is this nonsense? Is it even possible? Could Krell's $10,000 player have shipped with such a faulty anti-jitter set-up that the change would be that audible? What does this say about Fred Kaplan? About STEREOPHILE?

Yes. No. No.

That they are audiophools?

It reminds me of a review I read once in which the writer claimed that while he could normally hear the heartache in Tracy Chapman's voice, with this new piece of gear (a piece of freaking gear...) he could hear past the heartache to reveal the small bit of hope that was there. I nearly lost my lunch.

Audiophile or audiophile journalist, they get so deep into their own illusions that they hear what they desire, to the point of listening right through the music to the equipment that should be nothing but a delivery mechanism, to the point that they sometimes actually attribute some part of the art itself to circuits and transducers. At that point it is beyond hobby, or even obsession; it is self-delusion.

There's enough of that here. I don't need to read Stereophile.

Tim

 

[Mister Crash]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf It reminds me of the time that Art Dudley claimed that he could hear an audible improvement by turning off a cdp's display. Are these "improvements" possible to hear?!

I hear an audible improvement when I turn off the display on my CD player. When the display is dim, but not off (which is its usual state), I can hear a low volume, high frequency whine coming from the player (even when no disc is playing). If I turn the display off, that sound immediately ceases. When the display is at full brightness, this sound also absent. I'm not sure of the cause of it, but this sound is noticeable. When this noise is eliminated, it doesn't interfere with the rest of the music, and the music does sound better.

 

[monolith]

It's possible that what he was saying is true, but that's only if the unmodified player had audible jitter levels, which would make the unmodified player hundreds of times worse than most "low end" commercial CDPs.

Either that or he's imagining it.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Tim - Stereophile is worth reading for the music reviews. They do a good job of finding interesting, well-recorded pieces. The letters to the editor are usually worth reading, too.

Jitter exists, but it is hard to believe that manufacturers are able to revolutionize products every product cycle. Where does the law of diminishing returns kick in? There has to be a point where the results become subaudible, and "changes" are made by subtly tweaking the output stage. Seems the rest is fashion. Certain circuits come into vogue, those that aren't are called "dated"; that is, until they become fashionable again and the now "classic" used gear skyrockets in price.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif IWhat does this say about Fred Kaplan? About STEREOPHILE?

A good way to tell how good a reviewer is, is to look at how he describes sound. If he specifically describes the way something sounds in ways that could be applied to any kind of well recorded music, he may be a good reviewer. If he uses terms that describe the music, he probably isn't listening for the right thing.

Comments like "I could hear more counterpoint" and "music became more intricate and lively with the new anti-jitter circuit." tell me to take his words with a pound of salt.

There's a practical use for snake oil reviews. When you read a few of them, you get a feeling for how a reviewer sounds when he's full of it. You can apply that as a red flag when you're reading a review of a legitimate component being reviewed by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about... like this one.

All I can say is, I hope he gets his equipment for free, because paying a lot of money to correct jitter levels in a malfunctioning CD player is a total waste of money. If the player had audible levels of jitter, he should have just taken it back and bought a $50 Coby player with jitter levels 100 times below the threshold of audibility.

What I read here isn't that "mods can improve jitter levels"... I read that Krell puts out some seriously out of spec players. Perhaps the reviewer just got a bum one and the rest are fine.

See ya
Steve

 

[White Mike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vic Trola /img/forum/go_quote.gif Jitter smears the sound stage, constricts dynamics and rolls off the low end.

Shocking that the Krell would have that much jitter in the first place.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vic Trola /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ironically, too much upsampling can produce an effect similar to that of excessive jitter. A good test for too much upsampling is listening to a bass drum. When the drum sounds extended and you can hear the attack, you have the right sampling rate.

I don't even know where to start with this sweeping generalisation.... the original premise or the amazingly simple test. Extended? Attack? Quantified against what exactly?

 

[synaesthetic]

I'm drowning in all the snake oil.

 

[davidhunternyc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the current print edition of STEREOPHILE magazine, reviewer Fred Kaplan reviews the Krell Evolution 505 CD/SACD player. He says that during the review process, Krell updated his unit's "anti-jitter circuitry," and that afterwards he could "immediately hear an improvement. Everything sounded more coherent." "I could hear more counterpoint," he says, between string sections in a Gorecki. "Bass ... was also improved... it sounded both deeper and tighter..." "In general," he continues, "music became more intricate and lively with the new anti-jitter circuit." My question is, is this nonsense? Is it even possible? Could Krell's $10,000 player have shipped with such a faulty anti-jitter set-up that the change would be that audible? What does this say about Fred Kaplan? About STEREOPHILE? It reminds me of the time that Art Dudley claimed that he could hear an audible improvement by turning off a cdp's display. Are these "improvements" possible to hear?!

I was a subscriber to Stereophile and the Absolute Sound for about 5 years or so. Your above comments are so typical of these magazines. After 5 years of reading about my favorite high-end equipment and attending the high-end audiophile shows, I finally learned that the hyperbole is never ending. Every new cycle of speakers were, "closer to the original sound." Everything by Krell, MBL, and so many other extremely expensive systems were laced with superlatives. Then two years later, the updated version of the same amplifier was just so much better. But wait, I just spent $20,000 on an amplifier that is outdated and doesn't sound as good as the new one with the flux capacitor? I am just convinced that until there is some revolutionary application of electronic engineering, that the current crop of audio equipment will not sound like real life. Bold, brilliant, deep, better... whatever.

 

[Akathisia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by synaesthetic /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm drowning in all the snake oil.

Here friend, grab onto this rope made from daisy-chained Virtual Dynamics Power Cables!