Let the sparks fly.

[David Spearritt]

At last! A paper in a definitive journal. My AES membership is worth the price. Reading it now.
The Audio Critic Articles | CD vs. SACD/DVD-A

[David Spearritt]

Some more details of the experiment here.
BAS Experiment Explanation page - Oct 2007

[Adebar]

Hmm, sounds more like a comparison of converters. Instead of using 1 converter which is capable to convert DSD or PCM (dCS, EMMLabs, Prism Sound, Mytek) they used different converters.

The more remarkable is that their did not hear differences. The conclusion then could be, all converters of different manufacturers sound the same.

Strange, isn´t it?

[beyarecords]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

At last! A paper in a definitive journal.

*Yawn*....Anyway, back to work!

[springer]

Seems pretty straight forward to me stating the obvious that if you want the benefits of the higher format you have to have the appropriate decoding hardware... otherwise it is CD quality. I am amazed that anyone would think (hear) differently.

[locosoundman]

I haven't read the Journal yet, but the linked article says some listeners cranked the system over 100 dB.

Makes you wonder about how healthy their hearing is in the first place...

[Arksun]

Originally Posted by springer

Seems pretty straight forward to me stating the obvious that if you want the benefits of the higher format you have to have the appropriate decoding hardware... otherwise it is CD quality. I am amazed that anyone would think (hear) differently.

I know next to nothing about SACD, but I have to ask then, does that mean that the current crop of SACD players out there for consumers, the analogue RCA output doesn't deliver anything like what SACD is capable of because they dont have the appropriate hardware inbuilt?.

That really does seem silly then. Of course people at home aren't going to buy dedicated mytek convertors (well ok some of them are). But if the issue isn't the format or rate, but the hardware itself not delivering all the information present on the disc, whats the point!.

[springer]

oops - I was under the impression that SACD needed decode HW (receiver) as DVD-A. My mistake...

However, given the 85-111 db sound levels "requested by some of the participants" and the poor reception of the human ear, etc... I doubt there is an audible difference to the participants of this test.

I was reading tho that the higher quality signal was on the recording side and not the playback side, so maybe there is something to my original post??? Oh well... this is pure conjecture...

[Plush]

A well recorded and produced compact disc is very high fidelity.

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by Plush

A well recorded and produced compact disc is very high fidelity.

That is so true.

[mytek]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

At last! A paper in a definitive journal. My AES membership is worth the price. Reading it now.
The Audio Critic Articles | CD vs. SACD/DVD-A

Aha- essentially what they say is that a 16 bit AD/DA stock CDR recorder is as transparent as straight wire.

What about an ipod? Maybe even more transparent than this?

I'm stunned AES Journal decided such article.

My respect for Journal dropped big time.

Sad

Sign of the times , the pro studios are closing, pros are leaving and audio parascience is getting upper hand. Journalist and blogger is the new expert.

Michal

MYTEK DIGITAL USA

[boojum]

I know nothing about Mytek other than some folks think it is great. But rather than attack the reviewer why not run the tests yourself and see if you get the same results?? And then run some tests more to your liking and let us know what the results are. This would seem the way forward toward achieving light rather than heat.

I do not mean to offend, but have seen these test results start long and meaningless flame wars and hope this does not happen here. From my experience as a systems analyst my favorite quote was, "One test is worth a thousand opinions."

[sonare]

Even if the test was run again with the EXACT same parameters-- room, gear, time of day, etc, etc, ad nauseum-- you could get different results. Does this make the first or second (or neither) test flawed?

As a producer said to me today (as we were deciding on main mics), "you can get used to anything, eh?"

And he was right. I think. Maybe some day I will try it again with a different producer!

Rich

[videoteque]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush
A well recorded and produced compact disc is very high fidelity.

That is so true.

But also so rare!!!! Most mainstream music is badly recorded!!! Thank god we have jazz, classical and world music to compensate!!!

[narcoman]

that made me laugh.

[videoteque]

Some CDs instead make me cry!!!

[Plush]

Originally Posted by mytek

Aha- essentially what they say is that a 16 bit AD/DA stock CDR recorder is as transparent as straight wire.
MYTEK DIGITAL USA

No, I don't read them to have said that at all.

What I think they said is that when they played the hi rez discs and then switched to monitor that program material through the cd recorder, they were not able to *identify* any differences.

For many SACD's and DVD-A's I can certainly understand that this could EASILY be the case.

[mytek]

Originally Posted by boojum

I know nothing about Mytek other than some folks think it is great. But rather than attack the reviewer why not run the tests yourself and see if you get the same results?? And then run some tests more to your liking and let us know what the results are. This would seem the way forward toward achieving light rather than heat.

I do not mean to offend, but have seen these test results start long and meaningless flame wars and hope this does not happen here. From my experience as a systems analyst my favorite quote was, "One test is worth a thousand opinions."

I wouldn't post if I haven't had done many tests like this over last 15 years of my designing of digital converters. Listening tests are actually my primary tool that leads to design of transparent sounding equipment. As a matter of fact on MYTEK DIGITAL USA you can dowload samples from some of these tests of converter comparisons. If the paper conclusion was correct you ought not be hearing any differences betwen the samples posted there! Do you?

The paper authors conclusion is wrong. The only thing they have proved is that their momentary ABX test method is completely flawed and which anybody with real experience in listening tests will NOT use.

If I published a paper today with a revelation that actually 8 bit audio is indistingushable from 24 bit will you give me benefit of a doubt? Of course not!. This paper falls in the same category- their tests produces a result that goes against results of thousands of similar tests. This one paper changes nothing in the merit. They may as well have concluded the Earth is flat based on participants visual experience.

Let's ask rhetorical question to anybody wanting to actually consider discussing this paper:

Q: Do you hear or not hear a change in sound when a 16 bit CD recorder is insterted in your monitor signal path?

If you do- than the paper is wrong.

If you don't, a sensible thing to do would be a carreer change because you might be ruining somebody's recordings.

Again- IMO it's a shame such conclusions got published by AES Journal.

Regards

Michal MYTEK DIGITAL USA

[Plush]

Even the producer could tell the difference.

[David Spearritt]

Originally Posted by mytek

This paper falls in the same category- their tests produces a result that goes against results of thousands of similar tests.

That are published where?

[mytek]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

That are published where?

Actual sounds YOU can hear are worth thousands of published words. Why not download some samples from our website and say if you hear and if, what kind of difference?

click here:

MYTEK DIGITAL USA

Regards, Michal

[XLR]

IMO one can read the article as a sign of the time / of the listening culture of many consumers today. There are enough people out there who are proud on their i-pod and those little good looking white docking stations with inbuilt speakers where they put it in when coming home.
And I guess they really don't notice a difference, or at least hear no noticable difference.
But what does that mean? Even if the authors optimized their test method - these people are not the potential buyers of SACD's, they are really happy with mp3.

[loadbang]

I like system 4, however...

Denon 2900 Universal Player with full PartsConnexion mods... Geesh they choose a shit sounding midrange DVD player with poor audio playback. I have this DVD player, even with SACD it sounds woeful against my Arcam CD player at 44.1k 16bit.

Conrad-Johnson 17 LS line stage preamp... Oh now that is nice.

Sim Audio Moon 7 monoblock power amplifiers... Fair

Quad ESL 989 electrostatic speakers... Bahh, not the best, needs a good sub.

Muse Model 18 subwoofer, 24 dB/octave crossover @ 50 Hz... Oh ok, let you off.

Nordost SPM interconnects and speaker cable.. Should have gone Valhalla from Nordost for LOLs factor.