LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  February 2013

ARSCLIST February 2013

Subject:

Re: Audibility of 44/16 ?

From:

Clark Johnsen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:08:56 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (52 lines)

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Carl Pultz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> .............................



> What's more, the system wouldn't respond the same way twice to a
> particular disc. He asked me if I ever noticed that sometimes a disc
> doesn't
> sound quite the same way two times in a row.
>

This has been a known and written-about phenomenon among high-end audio
practitioners for ten, fifteen years. Some even have found a work-around
for critical listening.

clark


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 3:01 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Audibility of 44/16 ?
>
> One story I'd love some science applied to that's related to this -- are
> there _really_ any differences between BMG Music Club CDs and the original
> issue CDs? I've read several things over the years stating that BMG Music
> Club versions of Mercury CDs sounded "inferior." But the few BMG versions I
> have are bit-perfect replicas of the originals, so the bits is the bits.
> What else could be "wrong"? Did anyone ever do any tests to compare
> baked-in
> jitter for both discs, assuming BMG even used a different glass master?
>
> I'm also mystified by recent reviewer statements that the new box set CDs
> sound "better" than the originals (they sound the same to my ears), but in
> those cases, with all the pre-1998 catalog numbers, they are indeed using
> parts made from different glass masters from the US originals. The reason
> was, US production was done at Philips-DuPont in North Carolina and
> everything else was done at Polygram in Hanover Germany. Today, everything
> is done in Hanover, using the Hanover manufacturing parts. The other
> difference I've suggested to reviewers is mechanical playback. The original
> US CDs had shiny/slippery cores around the spindle hole. Modern CDs are
> somewhat rough and also are lighter net weight (by an ounce or more,
> according to my scale). So they might present fewer mechanical problems for
> a player, at least that's my theory (ie they get gripped harder because of
> the rough surface and spin easier because they weigh less).
>
> -- Tom Fine
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager