Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

[Trevor]

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:avb7mcFei3U1@mid.individual.net...

Audiophiles in the UK used to cite the BBC's Radio 3 (a classical music
channel) FM service as the gold standard for analogue purity, blissfully
unaware that the BBC was using digital technology to get the signal from
its studios to the transmitters.

Nothing new there. Audiophiles in the early 70's used certain viny records
for demonstration purposes. Some were direct disk analog recordings, but
some were digital recordings using vastly inferior equipment than what we
have these days

I still have a heavy weight, virgin vinyl, 45RPM, 12" "audiophile" disk of
the day, recorded digitally at 14 bits using a VCR and converter. Still
better than one using a tape recorder of course

Trevor.

 

[felix_unger]

On 13-May-2013 2:16 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avatpfFt51gU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 10:45 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no 'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would suggest.
True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.
That's true of course for dedicated audio systems for music reproduction.
Nope, not for any modern digital audio system that isn't broken.

So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?

However, when it comes to Audio/Video systems (surround sound 5.1, 6.1,
7.1) for watching movies there's no comparison in sound quality, if only
for the fact that analogue audio is only stereo.
I'd still prefer two HiFi channels to 7.1 low fi channels. Fortunately both
can easily be HiFi, even if they often aren't.

Trevor.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"If Julia is the answer, then what was the stupid question!"

“This election is about trust. The choice before the Australian people could not be clearer. It’s more tax or less. It’s more regulation or less. It’s less competence or more. It’s less freedom or more” - Tony Abbott, Federal Opposition Leader

Sept 14th. is National Rubbish Collection day.. ausnet.info/pics/rubbish_collection.jpg

http://www.facebook.com/SupportTonyAbbott

 

[Trevor]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...

So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?

They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not have to
bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their personal notion of
it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their distortion
qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce* a certain musical
"sound", but not a good choice for musical *reproduction* of that sound, and
certainly not when you don't want that distortion at all.

Trevor.

 

[Rod Speed]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...

On 13-May-2013 2:16 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avatpfFt51gU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 10:45 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no 'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would
suggest.
True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.
That's true of course for dedicated audio systems for music
reproduction.
Nope, not for any modern digital audio system that isn't broken.

So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?

Because they are brain dead fools that have never
had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

However, when it comes to Audio/Video systems (surround sound 5.1, 6.1,
7.1) for watching movies there's no comparison in sound quality, if only
for the fact that analogue audio is only stereo.
I'd still prefer two HiFi channels to 7.1 low fi channels. Fortunately
both
can easily be HiFi, even if they often aren't.

 

[felix_unger]

On 13-May-2013 7:07 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...
So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?
They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not have to
bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their personal notion of
it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their distortion
qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce* a certain musical
"sound", but not a good choice for musical *reproduction* of that sound, and
certainly not when you don't want that distortion at all.

So let's see some distortion figures for Hi Fi valve amps vs
transistor/mosfet amps then

Trevor.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"If Julia is the answer, then what was the stupid question!"

 

[felix_unger]

On 13-May-2013 8:30 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 2:16 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avatpfFt51gU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 10:45 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no
'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would
suggest.
True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised
approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.
That's true of course for dedicated audio systems for music
reproduction.
Nope, not for any modern digital audio system that isn't broken.

So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?

Because they are brain dead fools that have never
had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

So you're willing to claim there's no difference between CD sound, and
vinyl, or valve amp and transistor? You won't get many HiFi enthusiasts
to agree then.

However, when it comes to Audio/Video systems (surround sound 5.1,
6.1,
7.1) for watching movies there's no comparison in sound quality, if
only
for the fact that analogue audio is only stereo.
I'd still prefer two HiFi channels to 7.1 low fi channels.
Fortunately both
can easily be HiFi, even if they often aren't.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"If Julia is the answer, then what was the stupid question!"

 

[yaputya]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message news:avbu2sF5400U1@mid.individual.net...

On 13-May-2013 7:07 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...
So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?
They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not have to
bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their personal notion of
it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their distortion
qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce* a certain musical
"sound", but not a good choice for musical *reproduction* of that sound, and
certainly not when you don't want that distortion at all.

So let's see some distortion figures for Hi Fi valve amps vs transistor/mosfet amps then

from SC June 2008 Altitude 3500-SS Stereo Valve Amplifier (RRP $1899)
@32W THD < 0.63% at 1kHz

compare this to two of SCs power amp modules;
from SC January 2004 Studio 350 Audio Amplifier (transistor)
@180W THD < 0.002% at 1kHz

from SC August 2008 Ultra-LD Mk.2 200W Power Amplifier (transistor)
@100W THD < 0.001% at 1kHz

Also, valve amps have very poor damping factors which means the loudspeaker
cone excursions are not tightly controlled, especially in the 'piston' range
below about 500 Hz. (i.e. muddy bass).

 

[Frank Slootweg]

Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

On 13/05/2013 10:29 AM, felix_unger wrote:


In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no 'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would suggest.

True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.

True audiophiles use vinyl and tubes!


But for *me*, 4BH at 32 Kbps (WMP format) is just fine!

 

[Rod Speed]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbuafF5400U2@mid.individual.net...

On 13-May-2013 8:30 PM, Rod Speed wrote:



"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avbli5F392aU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 2:16 PM, Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avatpfFt51gU1@mid.individual.net...
On 13-May-2013 10:45 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no
'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would
suggest.
True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation
to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.
That's true of course for dedicated audio systems for music
reproduction.
Nope, not for any modern digital audio system that isn't broken.

So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve amplifiers?

Because they are brain dead fools that have never
had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

So you're willing to claim there's no difference between CD sound, and
vinyl, or valve amp and transistor?

No, there clearly is a difference.

But just because they like the sound of valve amps
more than the more accurately reproduced sound
with the best done digital systems doesn’t say a
damned thing about how accurate the valve amp is.

You won't get many HiFi enthusiasts to agree then.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

However, when it comes to Audio/Video systems (surround sound 5.1,
6.1,
7.1) for watching movies there's no comparison in sound quality, if
only
for the fact that analogue audio is only stereo.
I'd still prefer two HiFi channels to 7.1 low fi channels. Fortunately
both
can easily be HiFi, even if they often aren't.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 13/05/2013 2:05 PM, Trevor wrote:

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:avardcFslfpU2@mid.individual.net...
On 13/05/2013 10:29 AM, felix_unger wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no 'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would suggest.

True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.

True idiots you mean, those that actually have a clue (perhaps not such a
big percentage admittedly) know that after adding dither and a
reconstruction filter, there is no quantitisation remaining, only a FAR more
accurate signal than can be obtained by ANY analog recording method
available.

**Unless the sampling rate is specified, you cannot state such a thing.



--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[DavidW]

felix_unger wrote:

On 11-May-2013 9:02 AM, DavidW wrote:
As an audiophile I do want hi-fi sound on one of the inputs (I have
the option of directing its audio to a stereo amplifier and
high-quality speakers for those movies/shows that are worthwhile
having hi-fi sound).

In that case you will need good quality audio leads.

"Good quality" audio leads are a crock, like gold-plated connectors. Plain
copper wires do a perfectly good job.

 

[DavidW]

Sylvia Else wrote:

On 13/05/2013 10:29 AM, felix_unger wrote:


In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no
'true' audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I
would suggest.

True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation
to the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task
of faithful reproduction.

If the quantised approximation is close enough, you cannot hear the difference,
and it does have the advantage of perfect copyability and identical repeat
playings.

 

[DavidW]

Trevor wrote:

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve
amplifiers?

They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not
have to bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their
personal notion of it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their
distortion qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce*
a certain musical "sound", but not a good choice for musical
*reproduction* of that sound, and certainly not when you don't want
that distortion at all.

Some people might prefer valve amps just because they "sound" better, not
because they reproduce better. There are so many factors that affect the sound
that gets in your ears - the speakers and the acoustics of the room being two
huge ones. It may be that valve amps in combination with other factors produce a
result that those people enjoy listening to the most.

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 8:51 AM, DavidW wrote:

Trevor wrote:
"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve
amplifiers?
They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not
have to bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their
personal notion of it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their
distortion qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce*
a certain musical "sound", but not a good choice for musical
*reproduction* of that sound, and certainly not when you don't want
that distortion at all.
Some people might prefer valve amps just because they "sound" better, not
because they reproduce better. There are so many factors that affect the sound
that gets in your ears - the speakers and the acoustics of the room being two
huge ones. It may be that valve amps in combination with other factors produce a
result that those people enjoy listening to the most.

The tonal qualities and smoothness of valve amps is legendary

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
Two old guys on the golf course:
"I can't see where my ball went. Did you see?"
"Yes, but I don't remember"

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 8:28 AM, DavidW wrote:

felix_unger wrote:
On 11-May-2013 9:02 AM, DavidW wrote:
As an audiophile I do want hi-fi sound on one of the inputs (I have
the option of directing its audio to a stereo amplifier and
high-quality speakers for those movies/shows that are worthwhile
having hi-fi sound).
In that case you will need good quality audio leads.
"Good quality" audio leads are a crock,

That shows how much you know then

like gold-plated connectors. Plain
copper wires do a perfectly good job.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
Sept 14th. is National Rubbish Collection day.. ausnet.info/pics/rubbish_collection.jpg

 

[DavidW]

felix_unger wrote:

On 14-May-2013 8:28 AM, DavidW wrote:

felix_unger wrote:
On 11-May-2013 9:02 AM, DavidW wrote:
As an audiophile I do want hi-fi sound on one of the inputs (I have
the option of directing its audio to a stereo amplifier and
high-quality speakers for those movies/shows that are worthwhile
having hi-fi sound).
In that case you will need good quality audio leads.
"Good quality" audio leads are a crock,

That shows how much you know then

I thought all you needed was low resistance. You can get that with plain copper
wire of reasonable thickness and as short as possible. In the end, can you hear
the difference?

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 14/05/2013 8:28 AM, DavidW wrote:

felix_unger wrote:
On 11-May-2013 9:02 AM, DavidW wrote:
As an audiophile I do want hi-fi sound on one of the inputs (I have
the option of directing its audio to a stereo amplifier and
high-quality speakers for those movies/shows that are worthwhile
having hi-fi sound).

In that case you will need good quality audio leads.

"Good quality" audio leads are a crock, like gold-plated connectors. Plain
copper wires do a perfectly good job.

The point of gold plating is that gold is a soft metal that doesn't
oxidise, which helps ensure a consistent connection. I've had enough
trouble with poor audio connections to recognise the benefit of that. If
course, better still is a screw clamped connector.

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 14/05/2013 7:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 13/05/2013 2:05 PM, Trevor wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:avardcFslfpU2@mid.individual.net...
On 13/05/2013 10:29 AM, felix_unger wrote:
In that case you will need good quality audio leads. However no 'true'
audiophile would want anything less than digital audio I would suggest.

True audiophiles recognise that digital is a quantised approximation to
the true waveform, and that only analogue media are up to the task of
faithful reproduction.

True idiots you mean, those that actually have a clue (perhaps not such a
big percentage admittedly) know that after adding dither and a
reconstruction filter, there is no quantitisation remaining, only a
FAR more
accurate signal than can be obtained by ANY analog recording method
available.

**Unless the sampling rate is specified, you cannot state such a thing.

I think it can be taken as read in context that the sampling rate (and
number of bits sampled) will be high enough that the will be nothing
left of the quantisation noise that is capable of being heard by the
ear. The ear itself is not an analogue device.

Sylvia.

 

[DavidW]

Sylvia Else wrote:

On 14/05/2013 8:28 AM, DavidW wrote:
felix_unger wrote:
On 11-May-2013 9:02 AM, DavidW wrote:
As an audiophile I do want hi-fi sound on one of the inputs (I have
the option of directing its audio to a stereo amplifier and
high-quality speakers for those movies/shows that are worthwhile
having hi-fi sound).

In that case you will need good quality audio leads.

"Good quality" audio leads are a crock, like gold-plated connectors.
Plain copper wires do a perfectly good job.

The point of gold plating is that gold is a soft metal that doesn't
oxidise, which helps ensure a consistent connection. I've had enough
trouble with poor audio connections to recognise the benefit of that.
If course, better still is a screw clamped connector.

Yes, gold plating is very useful in electronics to ensure that good contact is
maintained, but you don't need it for speakers. I think my speakers have
gold-plated screw clamps. Looks nice, but the gold is unnecessary.

 

[Rod Speed]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avdalvFf8spU1@mid.individual.net...

On 14-May-2013 8:51 AM, DavidW wrote:
Trevor wrote:
"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
So why then do the most fastidious audiophiles prefer valve
amplifiers?
They're commonly known as audiophools. What people *prefer* does not
have to bear any relationship to absolute performance, just their
personal notion of it.
Valve amps are preferred by many electric guitarists for their
distortion qualities of course, something you may choose to *produce*
a certain musical "sound", but not a good choice for musical
*reproduction* of that sound, and certainly not when you don't want
that distortion at all.

Some people might prefer valve amps just because they "sound" better, not
because they reproduce better. There are so many factors that affect the
sound
that gets in your ears - the speakers and the acoustics of the room being
two
huge ones. It may be that valve amps in combination with other factors
produce a
result that those people enjoy listening to the most.

The tonal qualities and smoothness of valve amps is legendary

Doesn't mean that its an accurate reproduction of what was recorded.