XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
March 29, 2024, 08:01:00 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: August 6, 2017 : Phasure Webshop open ! Go to the Shop
Search current board structure only !!  
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
211  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1 Bass syndrome on: January 09, 2011, 03:45:49 pm
Just finished listening to Timekeeper. Thanks for the tip! Have not heard it for years, sat through the whole album, enjoying the music. Forgot to analyze, ha-ha. What was it all about, again? Ah,yes, the snoring bass. Peter wrote “snorring” with rr, so I had to google it. But I guess you mean this vibrant string overtone character?

How does it sound in my system? Quite prominent in the mix, considering it is Oscars and Counts album. Dead center, very tight, lots of bass detail. I don’t know his instrument*, but it sounds not to be one of the big ones, although he tends to end the songs on a low note (like the very end of track #5 Hey, Raymond). I certainly hear this “snorring” reminiscent of what you hear from noisy transformers.

*A bass is not a bass. There is a huge variation in brands, sizes, how they are tuned, how they are mic’ed in the studio and how they are mixed into the final stereo version.

After The Timekeepers I pulled out one of my favorite jazz nuggets, Christian McBride/Gettin To It, from 1994. Here is a very funk horn section on some tracks, together with McBride displaying his versatility and great skill on beautiful ballads, soloing or even side by side with Milt Hinton and Ray Brown. Hear their marvelous bowing and fingerwork on Splanky! Or McBrides solo take on Night Train, which is a well known hi-fi demo fave.

-Listening today through the NOS1, this album came alive more than ever. Don’t miss a thing, just sounds very “real” with plenty of (natural) low end and mid bass punch.
212  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NOS1 Bass syndrome on: January 09, 2011, 10:33:40 am
You mean we cant have both "real bass" and "hi-fi bass"?  Shocked

I have the Timekeepers. Will try it out in the afternoon!
213  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: And then there was W7 SP1 (RC) ... on: January 06, 2011, 11:27:30 pm
A funny observation today: XX plays at half speed. This happens with 96 and 192 kHz material when NOT upsampled to 384. Playing it at native (same) sample rate, it is only half speed!

Also, sometimes I get a slight scratching sound in the right channel. It happens only when I play upsampled the 384.  Pushing start/stop track in XX, removes the noise. Lowering the (up)sampling frequency one step (to 192) removes the problem too. It seems that the playback is more "fragile" at 384.

Or maybe it's related to my settings? (see signature).
214  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NORWAY CALLING: NOS1 impressions from Pedal on: January 06, 2011, 11:19:51 pm
DAY 11
God made love in my living room today. I swear. He was everywhere in the room, surrounding me like Q-sound on steroids. A new experience of the Jimi Hendrix Experience! (The title track from Electric Ladyland – ordinary CD).

Dusty Springfield singing the title track of 007 The Look of Love in 24/192: The soundstage is much bigger, her voice now appears more to the left channel than the somewhat bloated center position I’m used to. Still I’m not that much impressed by this recording, compared with the ravings the vinyl receives from Harry Pearson in TAS. Maybe the HDAD transferred mastertape lacks the mechanical colorations of vinyl?

Rob Wasserman/Duets: Have not played this CD for ages, feeling the CD never met the SQ others reported from its vinyl cousin. Well, today I listened through the whole album, enjoying every track with a veeeery spacious soundstage with oodles of details. Some very demanding female vocal tracks here, but it all comes through without hardness.

Rickie Lee Jones/Pop Pop – Dat dere: Another huge improvement of a plain CD: Spacious soundstage, clean clear vocal, raspy presence of the sax, and a very “airy” and “stringy” acoustic bass. Hey – who needs hi-rez?!

Elton John/Yellow Brick Road – Benny & The Jets 24/96 DVD-A playing right now. This is mastered too bright unfortunately, which doesn’t change with the NOS1.


Mani said it short and precise: NOS1 has a x-ray kind of resolution, sounding extremely transparent, but in a comfortable way without any edge or emphasize of sibilants.

I do also agree with him about tonal matters being somewhat “light” in the bass. This is no problem for me because with my active X-over’s I can re-adjust my 3-way system. Today I turned down the treble (>800Hz) 1 dB and tuned up the bass (<80Hz) 1dB. My XO settings are now somewhere between the settings of my RME FF400 and what I used with the WEISS INT202.

Also, to be noted, is that from DAY 1, I was able to sit closer to my back wall than prior to the NOS1. Usually this gives a boomy midbass, but with the tight bass of the NOS1, it’s only beneficial. And just to be clear: The NOS1 bass was superior from DAY 1, to my old spdif-run BUFALLO, simply sounding more “real”. -If I can get that little “extra” punchy midbass, it would be the icing on the cake. But the DAC is only half way through the marathon burn-in, so anything can happen. Also there are probably things to be tweaked in my new W7 SP1 OS.

PS: I am absolutely NOT motivated to go back and forth A/B listening to the same old test tracks, just to learn what’s changed the last days. It’s too much fun digging up old music of all kinds! Besides, the NOS1 is still a moving target due to the break-in, so better hold the “final verdict” until its performance has settled.
215  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: Challenging hiend cd player/transport result on: January 04, 2011, 11:09:55 am
Thanks for another great read, Peter. I love it when someone with (enough) knowledge puts things in perspective. It's quite funny/sad that the Hi-Fi industry majority is running down that USB alley, without knowing it's a dead end.

BTW: Why not licence your technology to Linn or some US company, enabling them to incorporate XX and your NOS DAC in a one-box music media server? I guess it all can fit on a pre-programed Sharc chip, providing State Of The Art SQ in an easy to use box. (Just a thought).
216  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: Phasure NOS1 vs. Pacific Microsonics Model Two - Round 1 on: January 03, 2011, 06:55:45 pm
Interesting.

I did a quick comparison between Adaptive mode and Special mode, and I think that Special sounded slightly darker. It was done at the end of a long listening session on Sunday, so I didn't have time to double check it. Did you try this, Mani?
217  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NORWAY CALLING: NOS1 impressions from Pedal on: January 02, 2011, 03:32:13 pm
DAY 6
The 5th day was New Years Eve, so I left the DAC in silent run-in mode. But yesterday, on its 6th day at work, I played the 6 Brandenburg Concertos by Johann Sebastian Bach – the famous 2CD Marriner/Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields recording. I think most of you are familiar with it. Beautiful string orchestra music, perfect for an awful hangover on January 1st.

Again, I was stunned by how much 3D information the NOS1 can dig out, even if you are seated far away from the sweet spot. Traditionally you have to sit in a triangle with your loudspeakers to experience a useful degree of depth, height and width (“space” let’s say).

But there are at least 2 sources of “space”. The recorded one, and the one you can “create” with (properly) delayed reflections from side- and back walls. I think with the resolving power of the NOS1 you hear more recorded space than before. The funny thing is that it can easily be enjoyed while sitting so far away, even in the next room.

Rejoice!
218  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: January 02, 2011, 02:21:45 pm
But Pedal, if it is all like you described in your last post, all is moot ! I mean, how does this proove that this particuar album is OK ?
I don't see it, and instead see the contrary. So, your explanation may be ok, but now it says nothing.

Don't you agree ?

Of course, when the source it self doesnt contain (almost) any music signal above 20kHz it's hard/impossible to meassure any difference. I have also the Adobe Auditon program. There I can zoom down to the very 1/96000th sample of the sound file. I did it to study square waves on (some modern!) titles I have.

If I find a passage on the Getz/Gilberto album with a clean hit on the cymbals or something, then I might can zoom in on that very spot, precisely the same place both on the CD and 24/96 file to check for differences in the high frequency response. ...But when going back/forward to Vista OS last week I lost all my installation, so it has to be redone some day I have time to find the program disc. Right now I rather give priority listening to my NOS1...
219  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: NORWAY CALLING: NOS1 impressions from Pedal on: January 02, 2011, 02:03:17 pm
DAY 4
On the 4th day God created The Beatles. Combining the legendary Abbey Road album with the legendary NOS1 during Christmas put me in Bible mood, ha-ha. (Sorry about that).

I was curious to verify Peters claim that the NOS1 removes the “grain” I always have associated with most 60s rock recordings. And you know what? It did! -Replaying Abbey Road with XXs Arc Prediction and x8 upsampling, it sounds more like a modern recording. The usual “hardness” is (if not gone) much reduced.

It reminds me about a phenomena explained to me by Norwegian amplifier guru Leif Ernstsen, who said that distorted music material is a much harder task to resolve, than “perfect” recordings. Because “distortion” has a very complex nature with odd order frequency components, squarewaves and other nasties.

Amen.
220  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: January 02, 2011, 01:35:43 pm
Hey, we got company from my friend achri-d, a very experienced and technically educated hi-fi enthusiast. That's nice! I hope you can contribute more to this forum, Christian, since you have jumped on the high-rez band wagon too!

--------

GENERALLY SPEAKING: Although 50 years old recordings doesn't contain much high frequencies, I still find the 24/96 rewarding because (when done right) you avoid the bogus downsamling done to CD.

Normally the old mastertape is transfered to 24/96 (or 24/192). Then they do some (more or less) editing in the 24/96 domain using programs like ProTools etc). Then it is noiseshaped and downconverted to 16/44. This process is rather harming to the SQ. Releasing it straight as a 24/96 file is better, even if the recording is old.

I had an interesting correspondance with British Producer Tony Faulkner, and he explained me these things quite detailed. He was very clear about most downsamplings to 16/44 was badly done, using "bogus" software. He was also sceptical to noise shapping. He also said that if recorded in 44kHz, a CD could sound very good. I think Faulkner is one of the most experienced producers in this field. You have probably read interviews with him in Hi-Fi News and Stereophile.


@achri-d: The last graph you posted, did you do it with the Adobe Audition program?
221  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: January 02, 2011, 01:15:03 pm
Maybe I am wrong all over...

Yes, you are wrong all over. Cool

Like I said in the PS: The 2 plots are not comparable, because:
-The Spectrum Analyzer feature of (my version at least) Audacity has a limited capacity. It can spectrum analyze only 24 seconds of a CD (16/44) and about 10 seconds of a 24/96 file. What you see in my previous post is the beginning of track #1 The Girl From Ipanema.
So, you have an average of the 20 first seconds of the CD, and an average of the first 10 seconds of the Hirez. So it becomes apples vs oranges.

Further more, if you listen to the start of this song, there is only a softly male voice and a low key acoustic guitar. In other words, no high frequency content anyway. On top of it, its recorded in 1963 with limited bandwidth microphones, probably rolling off at 15kHz. The recorder/mastertape in use probably didnt capture much content above 18kHz eighter.

The spike above 14kHz is interesting. Analyzing samples from different places throughout the song, it seems it is present only with vocal (not during sax playing), indicating that the voice microphones they used had a severe high frequency resonance.

On an old recoridng like this there is very little high frequency content. What you see above 15-20kHz is mainly noise. The particular noise pattern you see on the 24/96 is probably the noise shaping of DSD mastering. I have seen it on others too. The bandwidth limit of 44 (half of 88.2 - often seens in SACDs) confirms this indication.

---------

Repeated A/B* listening now to The Girl From Ipanema in CD (ARCx8) vs 24/96 (ARCx4) I find the differences quite small. But the 24/96 is slightly better. You can hear Gilberto's voice a little clearer, you get a better sense she is standing in a separate vocal boot than the rst of the band. Also the cymbal in the right channel, when the sax starts soloing, is more distinct.

*I hate A/B comparisons. After a few times repeated listen to the same short track they all start sounding the same.  wacko

------------

Summary, there is nothing "wrong" with this 24/96. It is ucompressed. No added EQ. It sounds marginally better than the CD, although the age and recording doesnt offer much high frequency anyway. Finally the price is very symphatic, costing $18 which is less than the CD in the shop.

222  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: January 02, 2011, 10:32:28 am
Pedal, try the 16/44 vs 24/96 version of Joao Gilberto and Stan Getz, just curious about your findings
Finally I had the chance to play around a little with my software.  Happy

I bought the original CD when it was issued middle of 80s. (In fact it was Verve who woke up the jazz lover in me. I bought practically all the classic Verve reissues on CD at that time, falling in love with many of the jazz giants like Oscar Peterson, Stan Getz, Billie Holiday, Louis Armstrong, etc). I know these albums quite well.

The 2 frequency plots show that the CD has the mandatory lowpass filtering at 21kHz.
The 24/94 download from HD Tracks has twice the bandwidth, extending to about 44kHz, indicating this is the same master as developed for the SACD issue.

Also, I performed a TT DR analyze of both. I have the licensed software for Mac, usable also for 24/96 material.
-There was a slight difference between the 2 versions, but both got DR=11, which is a fairly good result for this kind of material. Looking at the spectrum, there are no signs of compression.

Conclusion: The 24/96 download of Getz/Gilberto is the real deal. And it sounds very good (for what it is; a 1963 recording of a small jazz ensemble).


(PS: The frequency analyzes are not direct comparable because they are just printscreens with different scaleing/timewindow).
223  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: And then there was W7 SP1 (RC) ... on: December 30, 2010, 10:30:13 pm
I know it is a little cocky to say "what did I say?", but actually I was very happy with 9-z3 and W7 back in November, as reported here (to Peters surprise).

Well, what did I say? (sorry about that, ha-ha). Now I have jumped into the window, out of the window and back into the window again.  Too much

Anyway, no effort, no gain, of course.

------------

Since we are becoming a big family with the same OS, the same Julia soundcard and the same NOS1 DAC, can somebody share their recomended settings with me?  thankyou
224  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: December 30, 2010, 07:35:25 pm
Ok i will be reading this with much interest! And really Pedal i can not look into your agenda or have something to say about that but it was  a bit.... Well you now.  Wink Me shutting up now!  Wink

Hi Gerard,
I didn't understand your writing 100% but I believe it was all in the best meaning! (The price we pay when both writes in a non-native language).

This is a very interesting thread for me. As a contributing writer to the Scandinavian magazine FIDELITY, I have done quite a lot of research while working on a lengthy Hi-rez feature article. For that reason I have something to bring to the table, while also picking up new things and ideas from fellow enthusiasts here at the forum.

Roy and I have a parallell dialog in private, since sharing files is not a public topic, even if it is only for the purpose of "research and testing", he-he.

All the best!
225  Ultimate Audio Playback / Interesting Music / Testmaterial / Re: Why Does Some High Rez Sound So Bad? on: December 30, 2010, 05:14:50 pm
Steely Dan - Gaucho

But Pedal did you compared those to the normal 16/44 version or the mfsl version. (with ARC)

Frankly I didn't spend too much time going backwards listening/re-listening on everything. Too little time, too much music and too many plans in order to cover everything!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.113 seconds with 12 queries.