[Joe Bloggs]

Quote:

I can think of only two explanations, it reads ahead and therefore needs to read faster -> does a sloppy job.

True, pcdps needs to read faster in antishock mode, but it does this by spinning the disc faster, so that it reads data at a faster rate. There should also be some error check to see when it has read in bad data due to shock (or scratches, or whatever) so there may plausibly be situations where you get a better output with antishock on than off.

However there is also the concern of the pcdp reading data wrong when spinning up and down in power-saving antishock mode...

Quote:

What goes too memory isn't saved in the same quality?

This is the usual problem that is referred to. However there are some pcdp models that have uncompressed antishock--those shouldn't lose quality this way. These include (but are not limited to):

Panasonic CT470, 570
Sony D-EJ725/825/925

 

[blr]

Joe,
The uncompressed antiskip of the EJ 725 is a matter of dispute.
It has not been proved beyond doubt to date.
It is not at all clear how the new Sony antiskip works.


I have one of these.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Well I have been in the middle of that debate myself and I have been convinced that the 'off' position stands for 'compression off'

 

[James]

I've spent some quality time with my SL-CT570 and have some thoughts that I need to flush from my mind so that I can listen to music in peace

. The first two observations below carried over from my old SX300, so I'm assuming that it also applies to the S650.

1. I'm guessing there's some echo/reverb going on in the Live EQ setting, in addition to the aforementioned treble boost and crossfeed. There is no dynamic compression that I can hear.

2. The Bass EQ works by diminishing higher frequencies (turn the volume up: you get more bass!). It's a wierd, flat bass -- for lack of a better description -- very uncomfortable to listen to through my TAH and 600's. The Train EQ attenuates only the treble, so by the time you reach the Live EQ, it's BRIGHT! Yechhh.

3. 10-sec lossless antishock is ever so slightly dynamically compressed compared to no antishock (NOT quieter, that's different. What I mean is that loud noises are less loud, but soft noises are also less quiet). It's still pretty good, but it definitely sounds altered if you listen closely. There might even be a frequency tilt or roll-off somewhere: I'll have to find the disc I heard this on, but I remember hearing a very slight back-to-front shift in the position of some instruments when switching between the 10-sec and no antishock settings. End result is that acoustic instruments, live recordings, etc. sound more realistic with antishock off, although the 10-sec setting is punchier. I was pretty dissappointed when I discovered this, but the fact is that the 10-sec antishock is still perfectly adequate and the compression makes some things sound better, e.g. rock/pop and not classical.

By the way, if you care at all, my theory is that the 10-sec antishock is truly lossless from the data standpoint but the analog output is changed somehow to accomodate the activation of antishock. That's the image I have in my mind, anyway. Probably total BS, but I'm not kidding about what I heard.

4. The 40-sec lossy antishock has an edgy sound which makes it the most exciting of all the other settings. Of course, it has many other failings.

Sorry for a long and partially irrelevant post. At least now that I've decided to go antishock-less, I can listen without anxiety to my system, comfortable in the knowledge that I've maxed out my system. Or have I ...?

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Going by your theory, perhaps the sound is different because with the 10s antishock on more power is used by the transport stage and memory and less power is available to the hp out amplifier, accounting for the differences. This effect should lessen if you use the line out and / or plug in AC power?

 

[James]

Well ... it was more of an uneducated guess, really. However, my empirical observations still stand through the line-out and using AC power. If I were to wrench my theory to fit this fact, I would say that any power reallocation due to antishock is independent of the power source/analog output. Which doesn't help, I know.

To allay the risk of inviting wrath and derision for my above theory, here's a better one: perhaps the different electronic paths of the audio signal creates the difference in sound. For example, maybe the DAC sounds different depending on whether it is fed the direct bitstream from the optical assembly or from the antishock buffer.

Please, please, please don't flame me now with talk about perfect digital bits, jitter, etc. Remember, I've already decided what I'm going to listen to, and am now carelessly airing my musings, or as OutKast once put it: "Exit your mind, down your spine, and out your behind."

 

[puppyslugg]

The 'bass boost', 'live', as well as the use of the remote, all degrade the sound. As does the use of the wall wart and the anti-skip. Did I leave anything out?