[Silent One]

Quote:

I don't know Abraham Laboriel -- thanks very much for pointing me in his direction. Any specific recommendations for beginners (in addition to the album you mention above)?
 
I live at cool 8500 feet of elevation -- another 2/3 of a mile or so above the Mile High City. The only disadvantage I've noticed with high-end gear at altitude is losing my breath hauling crates of LPs from the mailbox.

 
 
Seriously, though, I've not noticed anything out of the ordinary when it comes to the sound quality of speakers or headphones. I do know that wood (like the wood cups of my old HF-2 and current LCD-2) requires special attention, but that's more of a function of humidity than altitude. Were you thinking perhaps of something related to the movement of air through a diaphragm, or maybe lower atmospheric pressure? It's a fascinating idea, one I've never considered.
 

Sorry for the confusion. I'm referring to one's hearing as oppose to the actual gear. Do you get to sea level now and then? Do you find a difference in your ear's ability to resolve at the two different levels? 

This is something I've long wondered and never got around to asking.

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

^ I think that music sounds a bit sweeter on cool foggy San Francisco nights than on warm and muggy Hawaiian evenings. Ahhhhhh.

Then again...

Definitely faster, more forward...
 
And YES, we're all wondering how Clayton SF is going to address the question of "What was the very first track you presented your Woo... all 19 of 'em?!" (kidding) I'm quite sure if I was flushed with your gear, it likely wouldn't have crossed my mind either.
 

 

[WindyCityCy]

I'm very interested in how this works out for you.  Please keep us updated!
Quote:

Hey Windy.  I'm still grappling with some digital smearing and was hoping that a preamp would help.  I'm still breaking it in and won't know until the end of the week at the earliest. 
 
I have speakers in my office, and it would be nice to just switch over to them instead of swapping cables and whatnot.  I'm also planning to bring my vinyl into the picture at some point and so I can have my WA22 plugged into the preamp and then switch to a variety of sources to feed it.
 
I have another preamp with a phono stage that I really like, but it does not have balanced outputs, the W4S has two pairs of balanced outputs, so one can go to my WA22 and the other to my speaker amp.  It also has two pairs of balanced inputs so I can go truly balanced through with the DAC-2 and whatever phonostage I can snag that has balanced outputs.
 
So far I like the W4S as it is clean and is a dual passive up from 0 to 63 and active from 64 to 80.  Also, I can set my W4S DAC output level to 60 and then feed the signal to the SE and deal with volume there which is more granular than the WA22.
 
 

 

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

Hey Windy.  I'm still grappling with some digital smearing and was hoping that a preamp would help.  I'm still breaking it in and won't know until the end of the week at the earliest. 
 
I have speakers in my office, and it would be nice to just switch over to them instead of swapping cables and whatnot.  I'm also planning to bring my vinyl into the picture at some point and so I can have my WA22 plugged into the preamp and then switch to a variety of sources to feed it.
 
I have another preamp with a phono stage that I really like, but it does not have balanced outputs, the W4S has two pairs of balanced outputs, so one can go to my WA22 and the other to my speaker amp.  It also has two pairs of balanced inputs so I can go truly balanced through with the DAC-2 and whatever phonostage I can snag that has balanced outputs.
 
So far I like the W4S as it is clean and is a dual passive up from 0 to 63 and active from 64 to 80.  Also, I can set my W4S DAC output level to 60 and then feed the signal to the SE and deal with volume there which is more granular than the WA22.
 
 

Your timing could not be more perfect - return home from vacation to find your system dialed-in & burned-in! ("Forecast calls for increasing productivity heading in to Autumn...")
 

 

[Clayton SF]

Quote:

Definitely faster, more forward...
 
And YES, we're all wondering how Clayton SF is going to address the question of "What was the very first track you presented your Woo... all 19 of 'em?!" (kidding) I'm quite sure if I was flushed with your gear, it likely wouldn't have crossed my mind either.
 

My first headphone amp was is (I still own it) the Musical Fidelity X-CAN V8p hybrid with a matching pair of Mullard 6922/CV2493. A wonderful amp. My second amp is the WA6. A wonderful amp as well (well we all know that, don't we). As for the first song on my X-CAN and WA6, it was Le Temps Passe by Jonaz Michel. An absolutely incredible live performance with a bass guitar that will absolutely test your headphones' strengths and then some. If I could upload it for your pleasure without breaking any copyright laws I would but I can't so you'll have to come over and listen to it on one of my amps. Also, if you can find out which CD that song comes from it would be a real bonus. I can't seem to find the CD--if it exists.

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

My first headphone amp was is (I still own it) the Musical Fidelity X-CAN V8p hybrid with a matching pair of Mullard 6922/CV2493. A wonderful amp. My second amp is the WA6. A wonderful amp as well (well we all know that, don't we). As for the first song on my X-CAN and WA6, it was Le Temps Passe by Jonaz Michel. An absolutely incredible live performance with a bass guitar that will absolutely test your headphones' strengths and then some. If I could upload it for your pleasure without breaking any copyright laws I would but I can't so you'll have to come over and listen to it on one of my amps. Also, if you can find out which CD that song comes from it would be a real bonus. I can't seem to find the CD--if it exists.

Outstanding... I still have value remaining on my BART ticket! My first hunch would be to check the database at the U.S. Library of Congress. You never know! How did you happen upon the recording initially? Sound better 'Tubed?' SS?? Or with a great recording like that, excels on both?! Will have a closer look...

 
Le Temps Passe - Jonaz Michel ~ 
 
Monsieur Clayton! C'est magnifique!!! I just heard it on my notebook. Now you've got me in the hunt! Your contribution here is the very reason why I'm sharing my music library with you in the first place - it exposes and yields huge dividends! I'd be happy to find either digital or vinyl...gotta have it! I might have to send Kevin an email overnight.  

 

 

[Clayton SF]

It came as a part of a demo disc from Kevin Deal of Upscale Audio when I got my PrimaLuna Dialogue Two integrated amp. The disc is bass-centric for the purpose of positioning speakers--BUT, headphones are a must for these songs, too!
 
These are the selections:
 
1. Rob Wasserman & Jennifer Waarnes - Ballad of the Runaway Horse
2. Jill Scott - A Long Walk
3. Grace Potter - Toothbrush & My Table
4. Bonnie Rait - Baby Mine
5. Rachel Farrell - Sister
6. Diana Krall - Temptation
7. Ava Cassidy - Fields of Gold
8. Vienna Tang - Soon Love, Soon
9. Dean Peer - Earth School
10. Neil Young - Cowgirl in the Sand (acoustic)
11. Melvin Taylor - Dirty Pool
12. Jacques Loussier - Gavotte in D Major
13. Jonaz Michel - Le Temps Passe
14. Aaron Copeland - Fanfair for the Common Man
 
Ah, thank you for reminding me. I shall slip into dreamland with CD playing....
 
Good night.
 

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

It came as a part of a demo disc from Kevin Deal of Upscale Audio when I got my PrimaLuna Dialogue Two integrated amp. The disc is bass-centric for the purpose of positioning speakers--BUT, headphones are a must for these songs, too!
 
These are the selections:
 
1. Rob Wasserman & Jennifer Waarnes - Ballad of the Runaway Horse
2. Jill Scott - A Long Walk
3. Grace Potter - Toothbrush & My Table
4. Bonnie Rait - Baby Mine
5. Rachel Farrell - Sister
6. Diana Krall - Temptation
7. Ava Cassidy - Fields of Gold
8. Vienna Tang - Soon Love, Soon
9. Dean Peer - Earth School
10. Neil Young - Cowgirl in the Sand (acoustic)
11. Melvin Taylor - Dirty Pool
12. Jacques Loussier - Gavotte in D Major
13. Jonaz Michel - Le Temps Passe
14. Aaron Copeland - Fanfair for the Common Man
 
Ah, thank you for reminding me. I shall slip into dreamland with CD playing....
 
Good night.
 

Thanks, Clayton. I definitely have Rachelle Farrell in my library ("Welcome To My Love" - 1993) - she's got a 6+ Octave range and can sing in Whistler range. Dogs bark, Dolphins dance...  :~)
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

Not to come across as a holier than thou, because I'm certainly not without sin, but if you borrow a CD and rip it, that's a violation of copyright law. You are permitted to make an archival / backup copy. You are also allowed to "time shift" (i.e., record from a radio station for later listening). Put differently and more simplistically, if two people can listen to two separate recordings from the same original source, it's probably a copyright violation. Most people don't view it as stealing because the original recording hasn't been taken, but, in fact, it is. You are depriving the artist of revenues that would otherwise be his. Statements like "well, I wouldn't have bought it anyway" don't justify it. So even if you gave away the CDs and kept the originals, it would be a problem.
 
But Icenine2 raises a good question... if you have a copy of Sgt. Pepper and you want to buy the exact same recording on CD, you should be entitled to a discount (or perhaps free, for an on-line download) since you've already paid for a license. But the laws don't really work like that. Also, if you tried to justify a download of a different recording of the same music, keep in mind that the copyright doesn't just protect the music, but also the mixing, etc... so two different mixes of the same original tracks would have two different copyrights.
 
It's a tough issue-as WarriorAnt said, "no one will come after you". True in all but the most egregious and easy to track cases. But the prevalence of this attitude has led to a significant downturn in the music industry since 2001, with no end in sight (see http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/business/global/22music.html).
 
You should at least make an effort to support the musicians and labels whose music you enjoy to ensure that new quality music will be available as we have all enjoyed in the past.
 
...sorry, didn't mean to be too preachy.

 
Since we're getting technical, I have a few questions if you have an opinion or know how the law applies exactly.
 
The first one is pretty straightforward, what about archiving a CD on your HDD that you checked out from the library? Is there a distinction made for temporary use? The analogy would be photocopying a page from a copyrighted library book "for personal use". It's also tangential to the debate of whether to use an e-reader for college textbooks, where e-texts are cheaper than a new hard copy, but you can't sell them back to the bookstore when you are done with it, or purchase a used hard copy from that same store in the first place.
 
Also, what about the distinction made for the profit motive, like if you give your CDs away as opposed to selling them after they are ripped?
 
This last one is a little more convoluted: this fall Apple will be rolling out their iTunes Match feature as part of their new "iTunes in the Cloud" service. This "lets you store your entire collection, including music you’ve ripped from CDs or purchased somewhere other than iTunes...iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 18 million songs in the iTunes Store, most of your music is probably already in iCloud. All you have to upload is what iTunes can’t match...And all the music iTunes matches plays back at 256-Kbps iTunes Plus quality — even if your original copy was of lower quality."
 
It competes with similar services from Google and Amazon, the main difference is with those services you have to upload your whole library for cloud playback. Apple will charge $25 per year, Amazon between $50 and $200, and Google hasn't announced a price yet. In the case of Amazon, it would be pretty easy to track you if you have the music in their cloud, and then use their online store to sell of your original CDs. Or with Google, they could track you with Gmail confirmations of CDs sold!
 
So here's the question: After you upload your ripped library, can you theoretically sell off your original CDs and just use the cloud for $25 a year if you don't keep a local archive and still be technically within the law? Again, perhaps it would matter if you gave them away instead.
I would imagine that it's all spelled out in their terms and conditions

 
More of a thought exercise than a serious question, as I would never do that.

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

Not to come across as a holier than thou, because I'm certainly not without sin, but if you borrow a CD and rip it, that's a violation of copyright law. You are permitted to make an archival / backup copy. You are also allowed to "time shift" (i.e., record from a radio station for later listening). Put differently and more simplistically, if two people can listen to two separate recordings from the same original source, it's probably a copyright violation. Most people don't view it as stealing because the original recording hasn't been taken, but, in fact, it is. You are depriving the artist of revenues that would otherwise be his. Statements like "well, I wouldn't have bought it anyway" don't justify it. So even if you gave away the CDs and kept the originals, it would be a problem.
 
But Icenine2 raises a good question... if you have a copy of Sgt. Pepper and you want to buy the exact same recording on CD, you should be entitled to a discount (or perhaps free, for an on-line download) since you've already paid for a license. But the laws don't really work like that. Also, if you tried to justify a download of a different recording of the same music, keep in mind that the copyright doesn't just protect the music, but also the mixing, etc... so two different mixes of the same original tracks would have two different copyrights.
 
It's a tough issue-as WarriorAnt said, "no one will come after you". True in all but the most egregious and easy to track cases. But the prevalence of this attitude has led to a significant downturn in the music industry since 2001, with no end in sight (see http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/business/global/22music.html).
 
You should at least make an effort to support the musicians and labels whose music you enjoy to ensure that new quality music will be available as we have all enjoyed in the past.
 
...sorry, didn't mean to be too preachy.

When I meant no one will come after you I was not speaking of pirating from the web.  
 
Consider this scenario.  You go to the Goodwill or even perhaps the used CD/vinyl store and you buy something used there.  Is it a violation of copyright law?  Goodwill and the used CD store are not sending royalties in for those sales.
 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

 
 
Since we're getting technical, I have a few questions if you have an opinion or know how the law applies exactly.
 
The first one is pretty straightforward, what about archiving a CD on your HDD that you checked out from the library? Is there a distinction made for temporary use? The analogy would be photocopying a page from a copyrighted library book "for personal use". It's also tangential to the debate of whether to use an e-reader for college textbooks, where e-texts are cheaper than a new hard copy, but you can't sell them back to the bookstore when you are done with it, or purchase a used hard copy from that same store in the first place.
 
Also, what about the distinction made for the profit motive, like if you give your CDs away as opposed to selling them after they are ripped?
 
This last one is a little more convoluted: this fall Apple will be rolling out their iTunes Match feature as part of their new "iTunes in the Cloud" service. This "lets you store your entire collection, including music you’ve ripped from CDs or purchased somewhere other than iTunes...iTunes determines which songs in your collection are available in the iTunes Store. Any music with a match is automatically added to your iCloud library for you to listen to anytime, on any device. Since there are more than 18 million songs in the iTunes Store, most of your music is probably already in iCloud. All you have to upload is what iTunes can’t match...And all the music iTunes matches plays back at 256-Kbps iTunes Plus quality — even if your original copy was of lower quality."
 
It competes with similar services from Google and Amazon, the main difference is with those services you have to upload your whole library for cloud playback. Apple will charge $25 per year, Amazon between $50 and $200, and Google hasn't announced a price yet. In the case of Amazon, it would be pretty easy to track you if you have the music in their cloud, and then use their online store to sell of your original CDs. Or with Google, they could track you with Gmail confirmations of CDs sold!
 
So here's the question: After you upload your ripped library, can you theoretically sell off your original CDs and just use the cloud for $25 a year if you don't keep a local archive and still be technically within the law? Again, perhaps it would matter if you gave them away instead.
I would imagine that it's all spelled out in their terms and conditions

 
More of a thought exercise than a serious question, as I would never do that.

My county library has acquired a huge  digital music library for e download.  I don't use it because the downloads are WMA Format
 
http://maricopa.lib.overdrive.com/B82BF222-5217-43DB-944D-E866A1D67E8B/10/284/en/Browse30.htm
 
Here are the rules

[size=9pt] Digital Rights Information[/size]

[td=colspan:2] OverDrive Music[/td] [td] Burn to CD: [/td] [td] Not permitted[/td] [td] [size=smaller] [/size][/td] [td] Transfer to device: [/td] [td] Permitted[/td] [td]    Transfer to Apple® device: [/td] [td] Permitted[/td] [td] [size=smaller] [/size][/td] [td] Public performance: [/td] [td] Not permitted[/td] [td] File-sharing: [/td] [td] Not permitted[/td] [td] Peer-to-peer usage: [/td] [td] Not permitted[/td] [td] [size=smaller] [/size][/td] [td=colspan:2] All copies of this title, including those transferred to portable devices and other media, must be deleted/destroyed at the end of the lending period.[/td]

 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

the W4S has two pairs of balanced outputs, so one can go to my WA22 and the other to my speaker amp.  It also has two pairs of balanced inputs so I can go truly balanced through with the DAC-2 and whatever phonostage I can snag that has balanced outputs.
 
So far I like the W4S as it is clean and is a dual passive up from 0 to 63 and active from 64 to 80.  Also, I can set my W4S DAC output level to 60 and then feed the signal to the SE and deal with volume there which is more granular than the WA22.
 
 

Mike do you own a W4S pre amp?
 
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

Mike do you own a W4S pre amp?

And how is the DAC war going, are you keeping both the Bryston and the W4S?
 

 

[cs16]

Btw, because of you guys, I looked at my little CD collection and I changed my mind now.
 
I'm gonna christen my amp with stevie wonder - live at last album. That's one of his best concert of all time imo.

 

[mikemalter]

Quote:

Mike do you own a W4S pre amp?
 
 

Yes.