Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

[Trevor Wilson]

On 14/05/2013 10:06 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:

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.

**I take NOTHING as read. Unless the precise specs of the digital system
are specified, there can be no blanket claim that the effects of that
digital system are inaudible.

For instance: There is abundant evidence to prove that a (say) 24/96
digital audio system is preferred by some listeners (in a blind test)
over a 16/44 (CD quality) in a suitably high resolution system, using
otherwise identical material. I would also add that there is
considerable evidence to suggest that many listeners can easily pick the
difference between DACs (Digital to Analogue Converters). In fact, some
of the best DACs are considered to be those manufactured by Philips back
in the late 1980s.

The ear is, most assuredly, not a digital system. And, with any audio
system, the digital signal must be, at some point, converted into an
analogue signal, before being processed by the human ear.

For my part, I took part in some blind tests back in the early 1980s,
using 2nd generation master tapes of live music. We compared tape
(15ips, played through Otari and Studer machines) to a Sony CDP101 and
vinyl, through a high end turntable. The master tapes were preferred
over the vinyl, which was preferred over the 16/44 digital. Further
testing revealed that the CD was preferred over the vinyl, using certain
contemporary recordings (Elton John's Two Low For Zero).

FWIW: I have not purchased a (new) vinyl recording since 1988. Recording
companies lst interest in manufacturing quality LPs long ago.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 14/05/2013 10:15 AM, DavidW wrote:

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.

**Not only unnecessary, but actually bad. Gold plating is necessarily
very tin and provides a poor choice for speaker connectors. Silver,
which can be plated far more thickly, is a far better choice. It's
superior conductivity is also a bonus.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 14/05/2013 10:43 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 14/05/2013 10:15 AM, DavidW wrote:
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.



**Not only unnecessary, but actually bad. Gold plating is necessarily
very tin

**That would be: "....very THIN..."


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 13/05/2013 10:45 AM, 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.

**Bollocks.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 13/05/2013 6:11 PM, felix_unger wrote:

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?

**For the same reason that some drivers prefer Model T Fords. They make
a statement about the person.



--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 9:35 AM, DavidW wrote:

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?

I guess it depends on what equipment you have. I tested various leads on
my audio system years ago and could hear differences between leads. I
even tried household electrical cable, and that can work well as a cheap
alternative. It also depends on the length, as you say. You might not
notice the/much difference between leads if they are very short. Even if
there's no difference in audio quality there can be tonal differences,
which can decide a users preference. I must confess however that I
missed that you were referring specifically to audio leads, since the
discussion was originally about A/V equipment. In the case of quality vs
cheap video leads the difference is very noticeable. I can even see the
difference between the various grades of Monster cable that I use. And
It comes down a lot to experimentation also, and compatibilities due to
differing specifications between various brands- assuming you have a
mixture from different makers as many ppl do. For example I get the best
picture with Monster cable level 1 leads with my Foxtel IQ box. If I use
higher grade the picture is actually worse, because the signal level
becomes too high.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"Oh no!! we're out of chocolate!"

 

[Trevor Wilson]

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.

**Like most over-simplifications, that is wrong.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 10:03 AM, 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.

With audio sockets on the rear panel of amplifiers it's totally
unnecessary since the connection is so tight when the cable is connected
there's no air space for oxidation to occur.

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.

--
rgds,

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

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 10:33 AM, Rod Speed wrote:

"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.

But 'at the end of the day' you have an audio system to listen to music.
What's the point of having a system you can pride yourself on as having
some incredibly low distortion figures if it doesn't sound good to you?
And everybody hears differently.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"I'm not young enough to know everything"

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 14/05/2013 10:41 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

The ear is, most assuredly, not a digital system. And, with any audio
system, the digital signal must be, at some point, converted into an
analogue signal, before being processed by the human ear.

I didn't say that the ear was digital, but the processing by the ear
involves the generation of nerve pulses by hair cells with the frequency
being encoded into which nerves are triggered, and amplitude by the the
pulse rate. What the brain gets is hardly analogue.

Sylvia

 

[Rod Speed]

"felix_unger" <me@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:avdidqFgohsU1@mid.individual.net...

On 14-May-2013 10:33 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


"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.

But 'at the end of the day' you have an audio system to listen to music.

Yes.

What's the point of having a system you can pride yourself on as having
some incredibly low distortion figures if it doesn't sound good to you?

Using that line you can just mangle the music electronically
as much as you like so that it sounds even better to you.

And that is in fact precisely what some kids do.

And everybody hears differently.

Nope.

 

[DavidW]

felix_unger wrote:

On 14-May-2013 9:35 AM, DavidW wrote:
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?


I guess it depends on what equipment you have. I tested various leads
on my audio system years ago and could hear differences between
leads. I even tried household electrical cable, and that can work
well as a cheap alternative. It also depends on the length, as you
say. You might not notice the/much difference between leads if they
are very short. Even if there's no difference in audio quality there
can be tonal differences, which can decide a users preference. I must
confess however that I missed that you were referring specifically to
audio leads, since the discussion was originally about A/V equipment.
In the case of quality vs cheap video leads the difference is very
noticeable. I can even see the difference between the various grades
of Monster cable that I use. And It comes down a lot to
experimentation also, and compatibilities due to differing
specifications between various brands- assuming you have a mixture
from different makers as many ppl do.

Okay, but others have not heard the difference.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2849/do-expensive-premium-speaker-cables-actually-make-a-difference
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm

 

[DavidW]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Not only unnecessary, but actually bad. Gold plating is necessarily
very tin

**That would be: "....very THIN..."

Just as well you corrected that. I wondered what tin had to do with this.

 

[DavidW]

Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:

On May 14, 8:15 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
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.

That's self-contradictory, David.

Not at all. You should have learnt by now not to go after me in the area of
expression and comprehension.

You're essentially saying that loudspeakers aren't electronic devices.

Nope. I did not say that gold plating is very useful for _all_ connections in
_all_ electronic devices. I said that gold plating is very useful in
electronics, but I did not say to what extent.

 

[DavidW]

Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:

On May 14, 10:33 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:
On May 14, 8:15 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
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.

That's self-contradictory, David.

Not at all. You should have learnt by now not to go after me in the
area of expression and comprehension.

I'm not interested in "going after" you or anyone else, David. The
problem with your mode of expression is that it inhibits
comprehension. You're more interested in showing what a dickhead you
can be than in expressing yourself clearly. What I should have learnt
by now is not to bother reading anything you post, since you're just a
deliberately time-wasting cunt.

Well, that touched a nerve, didn't it?

As for inhibiting comprehension, I would have thought that the very exclusion of
speakers indicated that by "very useful in electronics" I did not mean for _all_
connections. FPGAs are very useful in electronics too, but that doesn't mean
that every circuit should have one.

 

[Petzl]

On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:33:16 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

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.

Yes, I went to a friends place to play an Album he had a Valve amp the
turn table (top of the line) and four Speakers (top of the line).
There seems to be a "feel" of music as well as audio excellence that
comes into effect. My own system was no slouch but this pleasant feel
of lows and highs can't be digitally shown (yet). Live concerts in
*proper* auditoriums are the way to hear and feel good music
--
Petzl
I started with nothing and I am proud to say I still have most of it left

 

[Wolfgang Wildeblood]

On May 14, 8:15 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:

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.

That's self-contradictory, David. You're essentially saying that
loudspeakers aren't electronic devices.

 

[Wolfgang Wildeblood]

On May 14, 10:33 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:

Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:
On May 14, 8:15 am, "DavidW" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
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.

That's self-contradictory, David.

Not at all. You should have learnt by now not to go after me in the area of
expression and comprehension.

I'm not interested in "going after" you or anyone else, David. The
problem with your mode of expression is that it inhibits
comprehension. You're more interested in showing what a dickhead you
can be than in expressing yourself clearly. What I should have learnt
by now is not to bother reading anything you post, since you're just a
deliberately time-wasting cunt.

 

[felix_unger]

On 14-May-2013 1:55 PM, Petzl wrote:

On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:33:16 +1000, "Rod Speed"
rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

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.
Yes, I went to a friends place to play an Album he had a Valve amp the
turn table (top of the line) and four Speakers (top of the line).
There seems to be a "feel" of music as well as audio excellence that
comes into effect. My own system was no slouch but this pleasant feel
of lows and highs can't be digitally shown (yet). Live concerts in
*proper* auditoriums are the way to hear and feel good music

I still prefer component (analog) video to HDMI (digital). It looks
smoother more natural somehow, and better colour. Of course you need to
have good equipment.

--
rgds,

Pete
-------
"Somebody complimented me on my driving today. They
left a little note on the windscreen. It said, 'Parking Fine' "

 

[Trevor]

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

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

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.

Of course there is a difference, thankfully technology has improved greatly,
and the problems with valve amps and vinyl records are not something we have
to put up with any more. That a minority still choose to do so is entirely
their choice, and they are welcome to it.

Trevor.