XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
June 15, 2024, 04:09:26 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  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Recording Progress  (Read 6789 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
christoffe
Audio Addict
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


View Profile Email
« on: December 10, 2011, 11:55:30 am »

Here is an interesting article about the "Recording Progress" coming up in a January issue of ..............

* Recording.pdf (465.63 KB - downloaded 559 times.)
Logged
PeterSt
Administrator
High Grade Audiophile
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16837



View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2011, 01:29:01 pm »

Well, what to say. Still I don't think this digs up all what really is going on. Therefore today's (say 2011) recordings should be analysed as well. And then I mean those without severe compression.

Personally I don't think this is the answer to the change. It will merely be about the digital manipulation recording engineers seem to know sh*t about. Well, logic if we look at what XXHighEnd does, even in the bit perfect realm.

Quote
(The ear judges loudness by the average signal level, not the peak signal level.)

Nice thought, but not down to the merits IMO;
Instead, the average level is brought up hugely, and yes, then it just *is* louder on average. Almost the same "statement" but still different (more logic I think).
Also, this doesn't happen because the peaks are squeezed out (in, actually), but because technically the bottom part is boosted, while the peaks stay the same. This is different from just squeezing "in" the peaks, because that wouldn't change the general level. It only allows for not hard-cutting the peaks, which would be worse for the result. So, squeeze the peaks allows for not dropping the level in order to let fit the peaks. The result of course is a louder level, when utilized.
Again, it may come down to the same, but maybe this explains better what really happens and why.

Quote
In fact, some pop records can be considered creations of the producer, not the putative musician whose name is on the album cover.

But we may wonder who's fault this is. I mean, I think it is fairly rare when musicians want the best sound (if it were about SQ and not about what's commercially best). Of course, the mixing engineer during the live event does his best, but I don't think he is about the best SQ. Then again this is not "hi-fi" of course, and the mixing engineer knows that too. But the whole point is : the musicians do not care much. I have seen too many easily avoidable flaws to think otherwise.

That my last thoughts above are related to the sound by now (about) starting to be better than during the performance itself, is possibly why I by now think like this in the first place. And so today's problem for any engineer will be that he/she is not able to hear back what's really on the recording. I don't want to bring in the NOS1 into play again, but it really is so that it makes the difference in the world. That is, I don't see how a digital end result (which it obviously always will be these days) can ever sound good anywhere, with the D/A devices used in that studio or elsewhere. Monitor speakers will matter also, but I think we know what matters by far most.

Continuing on the above, this was different too in those oldd days. There was no digital to undeliberately destroy, and the tapes listened to for mixing (if at all, see article) only needed to go to LP, which was a fairly straight forward process. In any case it was much more straight forward than today's process of "digital nothing" while in the mean time we nag about "bit perfect" already (justified or not). OpAmps may destroy, but digital manipulation destroys more. It takes out the inconsistency. No analogue-fluent transients (when things are not OK) but sudden anomalies which we are sensitive to.

Both changes (those OpAmp consoles and digital) happened in the same era to some degree (of course digital was later), and maybe it needs some further digging into what changes which. That things really started to change in the early 70's is totally clear though, but this seems to be about the general sound (OpAmps ?).

?
Peter
Logged

For the Stealth III LPS PC :
W10-14393.0 - July 17, 2021 (2.11)
XXHighEnd Mach III Stealth LPS PC -> Xeon Scalable 14/28 core with Hyperthreading On (set to 14/28 cores in BIOS and set to 10/20 cores via Boot Menu) @~660MHz, 48GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 14393.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/0/0/*1*/ Q1Factor = *4* / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = *10ms* / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = *10.13*  (max 10.13) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / Stop Desktop, Remaining, WASAPI and W10 services / Use Remote Desktop / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD Off (!) / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *62* / Nervous Rate = *1* / Cool when Idle = n.a / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = Optimal / Time Stability = Stable / Custom Filtering *Low* (16x) / Always Clear Proxy before Playback = On -> USB3 from MoBo -> Lush^3
A: W-Y-R-G, B: *W-G* USB 1m00 -> Phisolator 24/768 Phasure NOS1a/G3 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (16ms) -> B'ASS Current Amplifier -> Blaxius*^2.5* A:B-G, B:B-G Interlink -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers. ET^2 Ethernet from Mach III to Music Server PC (RDC Control).
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere (also from the PC).

For a general PC :
W10-10586.0 - May 2016 (2.05+)
*XXHighEnd PC -> I7 3930k with Hyperthreading On (12 cores)* @~500MHz, 16GB, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit build 10586.0 from RAM, music on LAN / Engine#4 Adaptive Mode / Q1/-/3/4/5 = 14/-/1/1/1 / Q1Factor = 1 / Dev.Buffer = 4096 / ClockRes = 1ms / Memory = Straight Contiguous / Include Garbage Collect / SFS = 0.10  (max 60) / not Invert / Phase Alignment Off / Playerprio = Low / ThreadPrio = Realtime / Scheme = Core 3-5 / Not Switch Processors during Playback = Off/ Playback Drive none (see OS from RAM) / UnAttended (Just Start) / Always Copy to XX Drive (see OS from RAM) / All Services Off / Keep LAN - Not Persist / WallPaper On / OSD On / Running Time Off / Minimize OS / XTweaks : Balanced Load = *43* / Nervous Rate = 1 / Cool when Idle = 1 / Provide Stable Power = 1 / Utilize Cores always = 1 / Time Performance Index = *Optimal* / Time Stability = *Stable* / Custom Filter *Low* 705600 / -> USB3 *from MoBo* -> Clairixa USB 15cm -> Intona Isolator -> Clairixa USB 1m80 -> 24/768 Phasure NOS1a 75B (BNC Out) async USB DAC, Driver v1.0.4b (4ms) -> Blaxius BNC interlink *-> B'ASS Current Amplifier /w Level4 -> Blaxius Interlink* -> Orelo MKII Active Open Baffle Horn Speakers.
Removed Switching Supplies from everywhere.

Global Moderator
stefanobilliani
Audio Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2011, 09:24:36 pm »

Nice reading Peter ,

I think we should be documented in consoles and their inside circuits to have an idea of what was happening after all the manipulation ( and this is the thinking of the analog era ) . Me-today I tend to listen with relatively low gain amps , most of the time no-negative feedback and as a result surely not op-amps . I am not talking about chip amps which I decided to not put in my listening experience todays ( diy guy here )  . Many of the market-level amps are after all op-amps themselves around their circuitry , and there is still confusion about polarity of the signal , which seems to be a problem for some designers to respect or advise of .So it's not so difficult to back-imagine what are the results of op-amps manipulation just when listening with a non-operational amplifier , but this doesn't happen everyday .  I remember once I had to work with an all op-amp mixing console and recording ( analog ) , and it was absolutely impossible to obtain a good result out of it . The excessive gain of the stages with further use of negative feedback rendered the sound unusable .
In the Non oversampling design ( back to digital ) but also in the oversampling zone , using output stages with no feedback is very interesting also , especially cascoding the Current-output DAC . I must say today I would be very curious to try that together with XXHigh-End player and listen .
Logged

May 27 -2013 ,  0.9z-9

W8 pro 64bit, UEFI
sata ahci mode .
i7 (8 cores ) 2600k
RAM : 16Gig
XXHE on OS disk
Music on OS disk
Playback drive on USB3 to 4Gig Pendrive
Mobo USB 3 to Oversampling dac at 2X
KS adaptive , ArcPredict  , dev buffer 1024
Q1=8 , Q5=3 , res 1msec
Minimized OS , stop all services
X-tweaks : 45,100,1,1,1, stable , optimal
Disk Utilization : Split File Size: 120 ,max the same as SFS
Memory Organization : Straight Contiguous
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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 0.077 seconds with 19 queries.