Show Posts
Quote
Now you can start laughing. 
I can tell you, your timing was perfect. I read this line, and bursted of laughing.
The tense created by the introduction (I read the link, although I knew it already) perfectly came together with the crux. No jitter there !
But OK, here's my personal problem ... I believe you.
But now, how can it be ?
First of all, we can fairly assume that nobody really knows. Or better : nobody knows what's really happening in these areas of audio. On the other hand, I myself really try to pay attention to all what is happening here at my own place, as well as so called unimportant / small things people report. I all take them into account, and all together they slowly form a picture which in the end will create better audio playback.
That being said, obviously I already know from many things going on, or otherwise XXHighEnd would not be alive. But honestly, it is my feeling that this is 10% only of all there is. But mind you, this first 10% is already unknown generally, and there too you might appraciate that as being voodoo. But it really is not; it is just a matter of recognizing what's going on, and from there on proving it's true. That this still would be far from real science is another matter, but also unimportant (to me anyway).
To the subject, and 100% based on what Andrey found is true (so keep that in mind please), my idea about it would be as follows :
First of all it would be a coincidence (I say this because otherwise my explanation would not stand);
It would be a coincidence to the matter of 0.9r inducing for this, while e.g. 0.9o will not. Otoh, if different sounding versions all induce for the same sound signature on a recorded CDRom (as per the subject), my explanation would even hold better.
The two tasks of audio playback on one side and burning the CD on the other, will interact. They will, say, vibrate, resonate.
Looking at the phenomenon "resonate" you can already feel why I think it is a coincidence; something resonates at certain frequencies only.
Btw, keep in mind that both processes (playback and burning) are 100% time constraint processes. So (persistent throughout) resonating can be there indeed.
Techies/engineers will immediately say "BS", because the CD burner will work with buffers, and whatever is happening software wise, cannot influence the endpoint at the end of that buffer.
Well, that would be true for USB playback just the same. Right ? ... go have a listen ...
I cannot tell for the CD burner and how that could be influenced, but I guess if I'd want to, I could. I could by means of the very same I do it with the DAC.
Oh, it may occur to you that I don't elaborate on "resonance" (what, why etc.).
Where above is a "far out" explanation, I also like (better) to have this one :
For me, definitely things are going on in our brains when we hear a kind of playback we like, for the coming future;
Once we hear a playback which has something we like, from then on we automatically recognize this for the future. We can't do without that experience anymore. Example in the area of Andrey :
Each and every day I seem to recognize the "quality" of my car radio as a quality which was not there yesterday. I mean, when something better came from XXHighEnd, I tend to recognize the same in the car. Ok, my car equipment may be somewhat better than general, but actually it is just there, and I did not pay attention to it at buying it, and in fact it doesn't even interest me. I listen to it as background data, and things just occur to me ...
What would happen here, is that where I "learned" some good aspects of playback via my home system, some of those aspects can be there in the car equipment, but are recognized by the brain only when they are in the brain first ...
That the total picture keeps on being wrong in car equipment (ok, like mine) is unrelated to that. Good things only jump out when you know them.
Of course, when this would be the explanation of Andrey's experience, now all his self burned (or any) CDs sounds like 0.9r in his car, so this is just a matter of trying that out.
Quite another subject is the jitter being on the CD, with the explanation of the pits being more straight / longer etc.;
Personally I think it is dangerous to call this jitter as such. Indeed, culprits in there only unveil at playback, but then only when reading is not appropriate. It would just be errorneous reading, impeeded by wrong burning. Of course the effect would be the same as time jitter, so for that matter it would be true. Note though that there is a difference between a (44K1) clock pointing at samples and because of deviation a sample is missed or read twice, and a reader which does not read accurately, just reading plain wrong data.
Do note that wrong data in these terms is bout reading a 0 where it whould be a 1 (or the other way around) which can happen anywhere in the byte, and if this is near a most siginicant byte ... call Houston (and assuming this is not captured by CRC checks, or can't be re-read within the expected time).
Time jitter as what we speek of generally, is about missing / re-providing a SAMPLE. Btw note that IMO this can be proved by recapturing the data at the end of your SPDIF etc., and that there is no way wrong data comes from it. This means the individual bits stay as ok as they were and nobody is going to tell me that the bits get mangled inside of the (bit shift registers of the) DAC afterall.
Wrong data read from a CD therefore is a zillion times worse than missing/repeating samples in the DAC (which by itself is a zillion times worse than the DAC not being accurate in providing the proper analogue voltage, but that's another matter again).
From above follows that real jitter on a burned CD would be about repeating samples (I don't think that missing samples can occur here), of which I actually don't know whether they can happen during the process of burning. Otoh, it is 100% sure this happens at ripping, actually caused by processes not being able to keep up and therefore buffers keep on having the same data, and since burning is very similar to reading, why not (in the early days of burning you were not even allowed to touch the PC because of buffers running empty, the process not being able to cope / capture that).
All together, and no matter my first explanation above, I tend to say "Busted !".
There would be, however, not much distance to "Plausible", when all is taken into account.
What remains is that I sure do believe Andrey in what he perceived.
. But you know, it is hard these days to want it, because Vista Engine#3 can only be better than #1 or #2, no matter it would be bit perfect W2K.
).
