I don't really understand what you mean...

I use an RME AES-32 PCI interface to connect to my ADC/DAC. In XX, I have to set the DAC to '32-bit', or else it won't work. As for the recordings - I use RME's Digicheck software. It has just now transpired that this automatically creates 24-bit files, even with a 16-bit input.

In other words, there is NOTHING I can do!!! But I don't think the sound is suffering

Mani.

You're right!

BUT... it's definitely a 16 bit recording. I've just verified this with RME's Digicheck.

I'm really puzzled why the 24/176.4 file is only 4 times the size of the 16/44.1 file, and not 6 times the size. This implies that the 16/44.1 really is 24 bits!

What's going on???

[EDIT: I attach screen prints.]

Mani.

Hi Russ,

I have the same CD as you from 1997 (although mine seems to be 01-065122-10). I also have the SACD (7464-65122-6).

A few things:

1) the sax is a LOT hotter on the CD/SACD than my version of the vinyl
2) my version of the vinyl is the single-sided 45rpm, remastered by Bernie Grundman from the original master tapes
3) did you know that your CD is actually HDCD-encoded?

Will definitely look into Joe Morello's 'Morello Standard Time' - thanks for the reference.

Cheers,
Mani.

For anyone who is interested:

I've recorded Dave Brubeck's 'Time Out' from vinyl at 16/44.1 and 24/176.4 resolutions. These are separate recordings (i.e. the first was not derived from the second).

At the time of writing, there are 9 downloads left, and they will expire on the 15th of August. You can get them here:

http://www.filemail.com/dl.aspx?id=XJRYNNLTBXQOBAJ

Of course, if you do download them, please share your thoughts on how they compare with each other. Is the hires version really better-sounding? Can upsampling make the 16/44.1 version sound better than the native hires? Etc...

Notes:
1) Please disable HDCD encoding in XX - although the 16/44.1 file contains the HDCD flag (actually, so does the 24/176.4!), I haven't used any of the HDCD processes.
[EDIT: This is actually not necessary, as the 16/44.1 file has been saved as a 24-bit file by the recording software. It will be treated by XX as a regular 16-bit file though, and will play back perfectly fine on a 16-bit DAC.]
2) I have NOT applied any sort of DSP on these files to remove noise or pops - you will get a sense of how 'clean' vinyl can sound...
3) This album was recorded in 1959!!! Which means that the copyright has expired (in Europe at least) - this file share is totally legal.

Cheers,
Mani.

I've ordered a 'Schumann Synchronizer' from Healing Earth here in the UK. It's 'only' £149, so won't break the bank. Will let you know how I get on with it...

Mani.

Yes, setting the Q2/3 knobs to 28 (or 30) does reduce the leading edges... but it also 'softens' the whole sound, taking away some of the focus and tightness.

Perhaps more importantly: In the past, I've been kind of indifferent towards PeakExtend. But with my current 'ultra-fast' setup, I'm now finding that it is essential to have this engaged to keep QAP sounding 'natural'.

Mani.

Thanks pedal, thanks Peter. I'll try a few different cables and also play around with the Q2/3 sliders... sorry, knobs! But I'm kind of resigning myself to the fact that maybe 4AP doesn't cut it, and that you really need 8AP...

Mani.

Thanks for the warning.

For now, 0.9z-2 seems pretty stable to me. But I tend to load a whole album, set the correct volume at the outset and listen all the way through. Not a lot to go wrong really. But I will use a preamp before trying any new versions of XX.

Mani.

Oh no, I wasn't suggesting any sort of DSP at all... no one would want that.

I'm still trying to understand why QAP applied to 16/44.1 files sounds so different from native 24/176.4 files, both recorded from vinyl. I've just got my re-wired vinyl rig back up and running and also have a much better phono stage now. I'm going to do some more comparisons between the recorded 16/44.1 and 24/176.4 files vs. the straight vinyl. My thinking here is simply that the best playback means is the one that most closely matches the straight vinyl, though I totally understand that vinyl may not really be the best source for this.

Of course, things may be totally different using a NOS1 with OAP...

Mani.

But I have a request: Virtually all I can hear right now are leading edges. Is there a way to change the AP algorithm to keep these leading edges but to add more 'body' and 'warmth'? Of course, I have no idea how you would go about doing this, but it would be cool...

(Incidentally, you may get the impression that I'm using Special mode with low latency. But actually my signature is correct - quite a while ago, I settled on Adaptive with 4096, and haven't touched this since.)

Mani.

Let's just say I'm NOT happy... I'm close on ecstatic!

Using XX's vol control (with QAP) and feeding my DAC (with massively fast output stage) straight into the Magtech amp, my Quads have suddenly come alive and are dynamic as hell... and yet totally natural-sounding. An acoustic guitar (I have a couple) really sounds like one... finally. You wouldn't believe this - I hardly can.

Roger Sanders gives a 30-day money-back guarantee, paying for shipping both ways if necessary. But let me tell you, he ain't getting this amp back... This was €3500 very well spent.

I'd like to thank Peter and Telstar for pointing me in the right direction - it is because of my search for speed that I stumbled upon this amp.

Mani.

Yes, I've heard good things about the Atma-Sphere amps (OTLs, like the Bernings). I can imagine they sound great driving the Geddes Speakers...


And that's the problem - I'd really like an amp that runs cool. This is the main reason I let the Pass Aleph 4 go - beautifully natural sound, but way too hot. Now, the Sanders Magtech amp runs totally cool. If it sounds half as good as its specs look on paper, I should be happy. I'll know for sure tomorrow...

Mani.

I wouldn't mind if I thought I was actually moving forward, rather than going around in circles all the time. I mean, am I really deriving more pleasure from my music today than I did say 20 years ago? I'm not sure that I am. Of course, a lot of this has to do with what's going on in our own heads... Maybe I need to start taking some 'substances' rather than getting new kit... it'd probably work out a lot cheaper!

Back OT, I really hope I've found a good amp with which to drive my electrostatics. If not, I will certainly look into the Dartzeel NHB-108B. Another amp that I have my eyes on (but can't really afford, unless I sell my car, my wife's jewellery, and hell, probably my wife as well) is the Berning Quadrature Z. If it's a high-powered version of my Berning Siegfried 300B, it should be very good indeed.

But I'd rather not spend too much money on an amp right now beacuse I have a feeling that ultimately, I'll end up with low-powered amps driving ultra-high efficiency speakers with active line-level crossovers.

We'll see...

Mani.

For anyone who's interested, I've ordered a 'Sanders Sound Systems' Magtech amplifier: http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/products/amplifiers/magtech-amp. I think this should be a pretty good substitute for a Spectral amp. And you know the great thing? I don't have to deal with any hifi dealers or distributors. Joy!

Mani.

Hi Peter,

Sorry, I didn't mean to give you a sleepless night!

Thanks for your explanations. Yes, it'd be great to see an 8AP sweep to prove that things below 20KHz are exactly as they should be.

4AP (QAP) still sounds great on my DAC - the clarity is amazing, no doubt due to the lack of pre-/post-ringing. However, as I've mentioned over at CA, 4AP seems to draw too much attention to the highs, which kind of detracts from the upper-bass/lower-mids, where I find so much of the emotional content of music resides.

Can't wait to get hold of a NOS1 and hear 8AP for myself. Out of interest, what is the problem with 16AP? In theory, it should work, no?

Cheers,
Mani.