[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wholeheartedly agree. This is why I indicated that I don't believe A/Bing is the best way to appreciate the nuances of the player. This is why living with it for a time is. The brain gets acclimated to the sound and when the unit is swapped out, things will either be absent or newly present.

You've got it backwards. The clearest way to tell the difference between two things is to set them side by side and compare them directly. If you put more than a few moments between two very similar sound samples, you can't remember to compare. Auditory memory is very short.

The brain does become acclimated, but it's like going into a room with yellowish light or pinkish light... in a few minutes it seems to be white light. The brain corrects for sustained coloration in sound after a few minutes. After a while, you'll fall into the music and slight differences in sound won't be apparent at all.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yep, in fact, I've done this with Head-fiers and we were all able to detect the differences.

Who on Head-Fi did you participate in a level matched double blind A/B comparison with? Did you post the particulars on the comparison?

See ya
Steve

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif You've got it backwards. The clearest way to tell the difference between two things is to set them side by side and compare them directly. If you put more than a few moments between two very similar sound samples, you can't remember to compare. Auditory memory is very short.

You've said this on other threads before, and the sources you have previously cited for your statement that "auditory memory is very short" have been established to be related to something entirely different than what we are takling about. You can opine that in your experience it is easier to tell a difference in a side-by-side A/B test, but you have no basis to state categorically that this is the best way to judge differences for everybody, or that if one can't tell something in a side-by-side A/B test, they won't be able to discern something from longer term listening. Just give it up, will ya?

 

[bangraman]

I'm partly in agreement with bigshot on this one, especially the thing about audio memory being short and too easily coloured by expectations whether obvious or otherwise, but I think one of the other problems is that many of those who believe A/B testing can shed clear light on the differences fail to follow things through with the test properly when they're doing so, so that you have is effectively an uncontrolled test with the apparent credibility of a controlled one. What constitutes a valid such test is open to discussion but I have seen some A/B situations where it is really a toss-up as to whether it is actually more valid relying on your memories.


The best way IMO is to compare side by side where you have both sources on an equal footing in terms of comparison methodology and also in terms of ownership. A mix of long-term acclimatising listening and also direct, controlled comparisons. This is why after everything I've done to date I consider meets, short-term loans and shop demos - and I'm inclined to think elements of which form the majority of comparative opinions aired on various categories on Head-fi at least - completely worthless from an opinion-forming perspective.

 

[TheGhostWhoWalks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tin ears /img/forum/go_quote.gif Based upon my recent experience, I'd bet the best SACD on the best SACD player could easily outperform your player on CD only. I would suggest you do the comparo to the newer two channel only SACD offerings from Meitner, Ayre, Esoteric, and Marantz playing SACD VS your player on CD. Your player is ultimately limited by the format.

I've tried the Meitner and Esoteric, with SACD, and if there's any improved performance compared to my system, it's almost imperceptable. I can hear changes, but for the large part, those changes aren't from "great to better" but more or less just different. The Reimyo upsamples, which is practically the same thing that SACD does. I guess we could think of SACD upsampling the CD format, where as my player upsamples redbook CD - basically the same thing. After listening to SACD through those systems I'm very much convinced that it's not the format but the player.

You can read a ton of reviews on the Reimyo and their impression is mostly the same as mine: That the Reimyo even compares favorably with great LP systems. One reviewer stated that he was an LP only guy, but after hearing the Reimyo he's now about 50/50 because of how natural it sounds.

I'm not saying this to brag on my sytem, but merely to show that I'm not alone in thinking that redbook is an inferior format. I mean, I guess *technically* it is, but in reality if driven through a good enough player Redbook can keep up with not only SACD but vinyl.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tin ears /img/forum/go_quote.gif To get to the next level, you need to go High Def.

Video and audio are two different things. Digital is almost a bad thing in audio but in video the best in digital is what you're after. Audio is a much more finicky thing. Super high resolution digital doesn't exactly mean *better*. When people went from vinyl to CD (and those stupid cassettes in between) there was a definite change in resolution. And if we were to compare a standard LP player to a standard CD player (both playing the same thing) then the CD is usually higher resolution while the LP player has more warmth and more life-like tone.

The crux of what I'm saying is that there's a difference between high resolution formats (SACD) and the actual music that is extracted. It can be as high resolution as it wants to be, but if the music its extracting still sounds like zeros and ones (digital) compared to actual music, then it doesn't really matter.

 

[neilvg]

Yeah I pretty much agree - not sure how we got on SACD so hard-core here, but RBCD done well is very very good. SACD done poorly is not good at all. If producers were to focus on recording and producing very fine RBCD recordings, we would have extremely well recorded stuff to play. More so than spending big money on nice players (God knows I've done this myself), I would rather spend money on good software - but a lot of the music I love isn't necessarily the cream of the crop in fidelity. I do, however, notice a lot of improvement with a great player in handling some of these less than perfect recordings - as counterintuitive as that may seem - it usually does not make them sound worse... not at all.

Neil

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGhostWhoWalks /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've tried the Meitner and Esoteric, with SACD, and if there's any improved performance compared to my system, it's almost imperceptable. I can hear changes, but for the large part, those changes aren't from "great to better" but more or less just different. The Reimyo upsamples, which is practically the same thing that SACD does. I guess we could think of SACD upsampling the CD format, where as my player upsamples redbook CD - basically the same thing. After listening to SACD through those systems I'm very much convinced that it's not the format but the player. You can read a ton of reviews on the Reimyo and their impression is mostly the same as mine: That the Reimyo even compares favorably with great LP systems. One reviewer stated that he was an LP only guy, but after hearing the Reimyo he's now about 50/50 because of how natural it sounds. I'm not saying this to brag on my sytem, but merely to show that I'm not alone in thinking that redbook is an inferior format. I mean, I guess *technically* it is, but in reality if driven through a good enough player Redbook can keep up with not only SACD but vinyl. Video and audio are two different things. Digital is almost a bad thing in audio but in video the best in digital is what you're after. Audio is a much more finicky thing. Super high resolution digital doesn't exactly mean *better*. When people went from vinyl to CD (and those stupid cassettes in between) there was a definite change in resolution. And if we were to compare a standard LP player to a standard CD player (both playing the same thing) then the CD is usually higher resolution while the LP player has more warmth and more life-like tone. The crux of what I'm saying is that there's a difference between high resolution formats (SACD) and the actual music that is extracted. It can be as high resolution as it wants to be, but if the music its extracting still sounds like zeros and ones (digital) compared to actual music, then it doesn't really matter.

I think that's inaccurate to a large extent. SACD is higher-rate data, not 'upsampling'. However if we are talking about upsampling, as I said before SACD players in the same class as the Reimyo are capable of upsampling redbook to DSD. 'Natural' is interpretive, but for me upsampling certainly seems to pour warm custard over the music as it were while preserving the technicalities. This goes perhaps more for DSD upsampling than regular upsampling.

 

[909]

bangraman, have you heard a CDP-777?

 

[TheGhostWhoWalks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think that's inaccurate to a large extent. SACD is higher-rate data, not 'upsampling'.

I didn't mean it literally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman /img/forum/go_quote.gif However if we are talking about upsampling, as I said before SACD players in the same class as the Reimyo are capable of upsampling redbook to DSD. 'Natural' is interpretive, but for me upsampling certainly seems to pour warm custard over the music as it were while preserving the technicalities. This goes perhaps more for DSD upsampling than regular upsampling.

What do you mean by "pouring warm custard over the music"? To repeat 909's question: have you heard the Reimyo? To my ears it sounds more natural than most SACD players (the above uber-ones not counting) and even more natural than many good LP systems I've heard...

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 909 /img/forum/go_quote.gif bangraman, have you heard a CDP-777?

Only a brief encounter. Worthless really as I haven't owned one so I can't say anything specific about it. In this discussion, I'm going by my experience of other upsampling players (Shanling, Meridian, Bladelius, etc) I've owned vs the dCS three-box. The only Reimyo I've owned is the non-upsampling DAP-777, which I have to say was if not a disappointment, then a bit of a 'meh'. I still have it but it's consigned to office audio duty.


Warm custard? Smoothing effect.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just give it up, will ya?

It's Barnacle Phil the Sailor!

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is why after everything I've done to date I consider meets, short-term loans and shop demos - and I'm inclined to think elements of which form the majority of comparative opinions aired on various categories on Head-fi at least - completely worthless from an opinion-forming perspective.

People usually come to Head-Fi for the wrong reason, and they come away with the wrong information. Instead of looking for someone to tell them what to buy, (which usually ends up being "Go for the one with the biggest model number and the highest price") they should be looking for information regarding what to listen for themselves and how to break down the problem of achieving good sound so they can attack it logically.

But that takes work. It's easier to just say "Get a $5000 CD player because it doesn't have any of that nasty inaudible jitter."

See ya
Steve

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif People usually come to Head-Fi for the wrong reason, and they come away with the wrong information.

Classic bigshot.

 

[morphsci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif You've said this on other threads before, and the sources you have previously cited for your statement that "auditory memory is very short" have been established to be related to something entirely different than what we are takling about. You can opine that in your experience it is easier to tell a difference in a side-by-side A/B test, but you have no basis to state categorically that this is the best way to judge differences for everybody, or that if one can't tell something in a side-by-side A/B test, they won't be able to discern something from longer term listening. Just give it up, will ya?

x2

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Classic bigshot.

x[size=large]∞[/size]

Just do as I do, ignore, ignore, ignore. There are quite a few of these didactic people with limited experience and intractable opinions on head-fi that are simply not worth the time to respond to.

 

[TheGhostWhoWalks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Only a brief encounter. Worthless really as I haven't owned one so I can't say anything specific about it. In this discussion, I'm going by my experience of other upsampling players (Shanling, Meridian, Bladelius, etc) I've owned vs the dCS three-box. The only Reimyo I've owned is the non-upsampling DAP-777, which I have to say was if not a disappointment, then a bit of a 'meh'. I still have it but it's consigned to office audio duty. Warm custard? Smoothing effect.

The Reimyo is a few steps up from the Meridian I heard. Haven't heard the other two mentioned. The DAP-777 is surprisingly "meh". But consider its price compared to the Reimyo ($5k for the DA opposed to $17k for the whole box). I know that other $12k isn't for the transport, so the rest of that price is coming from somewhere. And while I haven't heard their new CDT-777 with the DAP I know the Reimyo kicked the crap out of the DAP combined with the high quality transport I tried it with.

The dCS trio is killer I must say. But for price/performance I prefer my Reimyo. If price was no issue, I'd probably go with that trio.