Three items to improve electronics and system

Hawkeye

olilugo wrote: »

Now this is amazing. 16K cd player, 20K cd player without a DAC plus a 16K meridian 808.2. I can not even image the rest of the system. But I keep on thinking all these very expensive components just to play a 10-20 dollar CD.

I guess I respect the taste and dedication to get the best experience. But I continue to be mind bugled at such an expensive approach to play something that for the most part was mastered without regards to be the best music possible.

Blue fox, thank for the information, I know you are just the messenger.

Would you feel better if Cd's cost 35-40? The CD is just the medium to get the music home into your system. While one can spend less money on gear and get a very nice sounding system, it does cost to get that little bit more. Obviously, there is a lot of hype from all manufacturers. Some of it has merit, some does not.

I do agree with you to a point on the quality of recordings at the mastering level. Depending on your musical tastes, a XRCD is recorded and mastered very well but that comes with a price also, $35-40 give or take a few bucks.

BlueFox, thanks for your input. I've always liked the MS products despite some of the bling by Pierre!

Gordon

reeltrouble1

I find Mr. Stuart's comments and work at Meridian quite plausible, his work is documented through numerous white papers as well as governing bodies within the audio community along with this companies stellar reputation and dedication to sound, to call his products or words a joke speaks to the level of intelligence and prejudice of this board.

I would suggest if you have not already done so to continue reading the TAS interview article with Stuart.

RT1

AudioGenics

instead of denature add a little moonshine and then it gets interesting LOL

just being cautious about the claims that are made.

interesting side... Reed–Solomon error correction is the methodology that is used in most CDs.

If the CD ($10 - $20) is questionable then just replace it (previously pointed out)
and
Find the better CD equipment implementation for a better sound

megasat16

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

I find Mr. Stuart's comments and work at Meridian quite plausible, his work is documented through numerous white papers as well as governing bodies within the audio community along with this companies stellar reputation and dedication to sound, to call his products or words a joke speaks to the level of intelligence and prejudice of this board.

I would suggest if you have not already done so to continue reading the TAS interview article with Stuart.

RT1

Meridian has some of the nicest speakers but the company is not free from marketing BS. Criticizing of their over the top claims does not mean it's a bad product. It simply means that their marketing BS can't be accepted or the product they offer is the similar stuff (may be over Engineered to some degree) but outrageously over priced.

And NO, I won't take it the CD player has enough intelligence to know what should be in the recording and what's not in the recording. I just want it to read the CD and play it AS what's been recorded.

megasat16

Well, if Meridian can offer players with Apodizing filter for 16Gs, I think every recording studio should have bought one to ensure they don't make errors in the recording / mastering stage.

I have no beef with Meridian and I quite like their products but this claim is hard to swallow.

The quote is extract from their ads but If anyone interested in reading details,

http://www.meridian.co.uk/media/12578/808.2-ds2-a4.pdf

Meridian’s research team designed an exquisite new filter based on this research – a filter with ‘apodizing-like’ qualities (you can’t do a true apodizing filter for 44.1kHz sampling) – and its first appearance is in the 808.2. It needs significant DSP to deliver, using much of the power of the player’s 150MIPS main processor. This filter system is so effective that it can even correct errors made in the recording or mastering stage – CDs played back on the 808.2 can sound even better than they did in the studio!

BlueFox

megasat16 wrote: »

Well, if Meridian can offer players with Apodizing filter for 16Gs, I think every recording studio should have bought one to ensure they don't make errors in the recording / mastering stage.

I have no beef with Meridian and I quite like their products but this claim is hard to swallow.

More than likely, now that the technical details are understood we will see these filters in the recording chain. In so far as their claim being hard to swallow, that is a personal problem. From a technical perspective, it makes sense to me, although I have not bothered to buy and read the technical papers at www.aes.org that describe the filter technology,

Here is a review from stereophile.
http://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/meridian_8082808i2_signature_reference_cd_playerpreamplifier/

megasat16

BlueFox wrote: »

More than likely, now that the technical details are understood we will see these filters in the recording chain. In so far as their claim being hard to swallow, that is a personal problem. From a technical perspective, it makes sense to me, although I have not bothered to buy and read the technical papers at www.aes.org that describe the filter technology,

Here is a review from stereophile.
http://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/meridian_8082808i2_signature_reference_cd_playerpreamplifier/

Are you suggesting that the real recording studios (not the ones brewing in someon'e backyard) use inferior products than Merdian 16K CD player so they don't know what should or shouldn't be in the recordings?

As far as the technology is concerned, I understand it's upsampling so more digitizing data points are taken before transmitting to the DAC to ensure data integrity after the CDP reads from the CD. It make sense and it also makes sense that they have a kick **** apodizing filters using a GOOD DSP and a good computing power to ensure it's not lagging the data stream from the CDP to the DAC.

But claiming things like CDP knowing what should be or shouldn't be in the recordings is making the same claim as you know what I am thinking before I am actually speaking out from my mouth. I know there are Physics out there but I don't know any Physics CDP till now.

Anyway, there is no need to over sell the good stuff with bad marketing BS. It's not needed, IMO.

AudioGenics

this requires a deeper investigation...

megasat16

JVC,

What sounds good and what's accurate music reproduction is sometimes two different things. You can make a lousy recording sounds better (using all kinds of gadgets during playback and lousy singers sounds awesome in the recoding studio) but it doesn't mean it's accurately recorded or reproducing what's being recorded. I am in the accuracy camp regardless of it sounds good or bad. You can go deeper but my investigation of this matter comes to an end.

AudioGenics

totally in agreement there....

I saw on NOVA pbs.org a software product called
Auto-tune Magic Computer Pitch Correction
http://www.antarestech.com/about/history.shtml
http://www.antarestech.com/products/

reeltrouble1

megasat16 wrote: »

Meridian has some of the nicest speakers but the company is not free from marketing BS. Criticizing of their over the top claims does not mean it's a bad product. It simply means that their marketing BS can't be accepted or the product they offer is the similar stuff (may be over Engineered to some degree) but outrageously over priced.

And NO, I won't take it the CD player has enough intelligence to know what should be in the recording and what's not in the recording. I just want it to read the CD and play it AS what's been recorded.

your dribbling, did you read the article?? or are you just itching from that sand in your crotch. I will look again, however, I do not recall such a claim. the claim was that the filter could eliminate the ringing before the signal, if it does say that then remember, the reviewer wrote the article, not Meridian or Stuart.

BTW--lower your voice and look at the pics in TAS, lots of tubes, unfortunately none in this machine, which also does not do any high rez, go figure..

RT1

megasat16

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

your dribbling, did you read the article?? or are you just itching from that sand in your crotch. I will look again, however, I do not recall such a claim. the claim was that the filter could eliminate the ringing before the signal, if it does say that then remember, the reviewer wrote the article, not Meridian or Stuart.

BTW--lower your voice and look at the pics in TAS, lots of tubes, unfortunately none in this machine, which also does not do any high rez, go figure..

RT1

Do you even read my posts? The quote is provided and my emphasizes is on the stuff about the quote. It's not to argue what works and what is not. Do you understand the over-hype marketing presented in the Quote I made above? It's directly extracted from the Merdian Player Documentations on Meridian website.

Pull the sand out from your eyes, wear the glasses and read my posts again to make sense. It's not about technology. It's about what the marketing ad said about the guessing games of how it could make sounds better than the original recordings. Gees...I can add nothing to your fantasy about the glowing bulbs....

reeltrouble1

megasat16 wrote: »

Do you even read my posts?

well, hardly..........

after further discussion with the pontificator of the original quote we have determined the language on the web-site needs further investigation, we may very well have lunch with Bob sometime while you are building your castles of sand.

RT1--totally apodized.

megasat16

hardly? Bob? investigate? castles?

Does Not Compute...Does Not Compute...

george daniel

got in on the tail end of this thread,,but I gotta' say this,,, seems appropriate,,here goes,,,, Castles made of sand,,,,,fall into the sea,,,,,eventually. J. Hendrix--Marshall amps,, tube powered,,IIRC EL-34's.

Eh,, maybe 6550's?

BlueFox

megasat16 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the real recording studios (not the ones brewing in someon'e backyard) use inferior products than Merdian 16K CD player so they don't know what should or shouldn't be in the recordings?

I am saying now that pre-ringing is understood we can expect to see technology to eliminate this distortion incorporated into the front end recording equipment. Of course, maybe you naysayers are correct, and thier claims are all hype. If so it will not stand the test of time. I would expect Meridian to get a lot of bad press if it were found out they are trying to sell a $16K CDP based on hype.

The impression I received from the article, and the interview with the founder, is they know what they are talking about. More than I do about this subject. :rolleyes:

Erik Tracy

BlueFox wrote: »

I am saying now that pre-ringing is understood we can expect to see technology to eliminate this distortion incorporated into the front end recording equipment. Of course, maybe you naysayers are correct, and thier claims are all hype. If so it will not stand the test of time. I would expect Meridian to get a lot of bad press if it were found out they are trying to sell a $16K CDP based on hype.

The impression I received from the article, and the interview with the founder, is they know what they are talking about. More than I do about this subject. :rolleyes:

Well, I'd be suspect if Meridian ends up being the vendor of choice by studios....it would smack of providing the solution to a 'problem' they created.

megasat16

george daniel wrote: »

got in on the tail end of this thread,,but I gotta' say this,,, seems appropriate,,here goes,,,, Castles made of sand,,,,,fall into the sea,,,,,eventually. J. Hendrix--Marshall amps,, tube powered,,IIRC EL-34's.

Eh,, maybe 6550's?

Eh...Tube Talks...you geeks.

BlueFox wrote: »

I am saying now that pre-ringing is understood we can expect to see technology to eliminate this distortion incorporated into the front end recording equipment. Of course, maybe you naysayers are correct, and thier claims are all hype. If so it will not stand the test of time. I would expect Meridian to get a lot of bad press if it were found out they are trying to sell a $16K CDP based on hype.

The impression I received from the article, and the interview with the founder, is they know what they are talking about. More than I do about this subject. :rolleyes:

Why do I have a feeling we are talking about different subjects on the same topics? :rolleyes: I am not arguing whether Meridian solution actually works as they claim or not. And I am not saying Nay to a good product Meridian is offering. I know Meridian makes some great products and I value their good Engineering. That's why I am saying is that the over marketing hype is not needed for a good product.

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Well, I'd be suspect if Meridian ends up being the vendor of choice by studios....it would smack of providing the solution to a 'problem' they created.

You Hit the Jackpot!

Systems

Its pretty simple,Meridians new filter overcomes (or atleast claims to) an inherent flaw found in the response of a normal digital filter. It is not removing any music but an artifact induced into the data stream by the less than ideal response charateristics of digital filters.

How much the new filter contributes to the reported excellent SQ is hard to say.


Bob Stuart is one the smartest digital/DSP audio guys on the planet period.

Systems

Is the TAS article on the Meridian available online?

megasat16

GV#27 wrote: »

Its pretty simple,Meridians new filter overcomes (or atleast claims to) an inherent flaw found in the response of a normal digital filter. It is not removing any music but an artifact induced into the data stream by the less than ideal response charateristics of digital filters.

How much the new filter contributes to the reported excellent SQ is hard to say.


Bob Stuart is one the smartest digital/DSP audio guys on the planet period.

I think there are many players that does Upsampling and comes under all price ranges. The real benefits of the upsampling player is small if the onboard DAC is used. Since the data stored in the CD is read at 44.1KHz, the actual data is 44.1KHz. Upsampling real advantage is when it's transmitted over a distance. The actual 0 and 1 from 44.1KHz data stream can change due to interference and data lagging.

So, if you upsample the initial 0 and 1 from 44.1KHz data stream with more digitizing points and transmit from the CD Transport to the DAC and read every 4 bits as one single bit from Original 44.1KHz stream, the data integrity is much more accurate and loss of single bit errors are eliminated automatically. But the effective data is still 44.1KHz at the end (DAC). Depending on the type of anti-aliasing filter used, it would probably means smoother transitions between bits (more smaller peaks and dips in 176.4KHz data stream but obviously the peaks and dips are not as highs or lows and far apart as in using 44.1KHz). That may yields better sound quality or not but it's hard to tell what's exactly it should sounds like but also results in more deviation from the original analog recording. But if the CDs are pressed at 176.4KHz, it would mean definitely a better sound....

But there is more than......

http://www.meridian.co.uk/media/12578/808.2-ds2-a4.pdf

It seems this paper I found on Meridian is somewhat similar or identical to TAS review given by the same person.

Meridian’s research team designed an exquisite new filter based on this research – a filter with ‘apodizing-like’ qualities (you can’t do a true apodizing filter for 44.1kHz sampling) – and its first appearance is in the 808.2. It needs significant DSP to deliver, using much of the power of the player’s 150MIPS main processor. This filter system is so effective that it can even correct errors made in the recording or mastering stage – CDs played back on the 808.2 can sound even better than they did in the studio!

Other than that, I think DSP and Meridian is synonymous in Audio Realm and they make some of the nicest speakers out there.

megasat16

Ok! I've given more thought after I made the above post.

In order to perfect the digital filter, they need to write a very specialized software for their DSP and compare it to that of the other digital filters in other players at normal sampling 44.1KHz and other upsampled frequencies. And then, compare all 4 or 5 streams of data against the original analog recordings as well as the mastering equipments used in the studios. Also, they need the very high end DSO in order to achieve a true and meaningful comparison.

BlueFox

GV#27 wrote: »

Is the TAS article on the Meridian available online?

http://www.avguide.com/theabsolutesound/the-absolute-sound-august-09

You have to buy it though.

Systems

megasat16 wrote: »

I think there are many players that does Upsampling and comes under all price ranges.

Yes there are but the Meridian is a SOTA player and would be in the mega buck range with or without it's fancy filter.Meridian's "apodizing" digital filter is doing more than just the basic upsampling as is done in most players and DAC's.

The real benefits of the upsampling player is small if the onboard DAC is used... ..Upsamplings real advantage is when it's transmitted over a distance.

I disagree,upsampling will have the same benifits whether it be in a stand alone CDP or an outboard DAC.It is true that if a sample rate converter IC (upsampler) is implemented into an outboard DAC then it will reduce jitter levels resulting from the SPDIF connection, but that doesn't give it the performance edge over a CDP.In fact the absence of the jitter inducing SPDIF cable would potentially favour the CDP.(Not taking into account the important things like analog stages,power supplies etc).

Systems

BlueFox wrote: »

http://www.avguide.com/theabsolutesound/the-absolute-sound-august-09

You have to buy it though.

Oh ok I guess I will pick up a copy up for cottage reading next week.;)

megasat16

GV#27 wrote: »

Yes there are but the Meridian is a SOTA player and would be in the mega buck range with or without it's fancy filter.Meridian's "apodizing" digital filter is doing more than just the basic upsampling as is done in most players and DAC's. I disagree,upsampling will have the same benifits whether it be in a stand alone CDP or an outboard DAC.It is true that if a sample rate converter IC (upsampler) is implemented into an outboard DAC then it will reduce jitter levels resulting from the SPDIF connection, but that doesn't give it the performance edge over a CDP.In fact the absence of the jitter inducing SPDIF cable would potentially favour the CDP.(Not taking into account the important things like analog stages,power supplies etc).

If Meridian comes up with a new DSP algorithm and had compared it to all the original sources and other DSP algorithm and ended up with the closest representation to the original analog source with their kick-**** DSP, it would means they have SOTA player. But again, it needs to be in the ADC as well as DAC ends or the results will be an half-****. But even with the new DSP algorithm, it's not necessary making the CD sounds better than what the studio has put on the CD.

As for the upsampling, the stand alone players with upsampling will yield little result over 44.1KHz sampling player provided the same PS and Analog sections are used. It's due to the original data which is 44.1KHz to begin with. Since the DAC is so close, there is little effect of jitter and noise induced interference regardless of 44.1KHz or upsampling is used.

The more sampling does not necessary making it's more closer to the Original Sound. We need to make more sampling from the root which is the Analog recording in order to make closer to the Original Sound.

If we make more sampling from the copy which is 44.1KHz, the best we come up is closer to 44.1KHz and not the original sound.

We won't be able to make clones out of the copies. But if Meridian is claiming it can perfects it (I don't think it ever does make such claim), it's a good news indeed for the DSP industry.

If CDP is used as a transport, it's obvious reasons are already stated.

Systems

megasat16 wrote: »

As for the upsampling, the stand alone players with upsampling will yield little result over 44.1KHz sampling player provided the same PS and Analog sections are used. It's due to the original data which is 44.1KHz to begin with.

While it starts at the standard redbook 16/44.k the upsampling process will increase the bit depth and sample rate whether it be in a CDP or external DAC.

Since the DAC is so close, there is little effect of jitter and noise induced interference regardless of 44.1KHz or upsampling is used.

Exactly my point of the CDP having potentially less jitter than using the outbourd DAC.

The more sampling does not necessary making it's more closer to the Original Sound. We need to make more sampling from the root which is the Analog recording in order to make closer to the Original Sound.

Having only 16 bits and a 44.1k sample frequency to work with the upsampling process is basically guessimating at the data points when it increases it to 24 bit/192k etc.Upsampling might not be universally lauded as a major sonic improvement, but maybe with the type of DSP power the likes of Meridian and DCS are thrownig at the problem some of the limitations of the standard redbook will be diminished.

megasat16

GV#27 wrote: »

Having only 16 bits and a 44.1k sample frequency to work with the upsampling process is basically guessimating at the data points when it increases it to 24 bit/192k etc.Upsampling might not be universally lauded as a major sonic improvement, but maybe with the type of DSP power the likes of Meridian and DCS are thrownig at the problem some of the limitations of the standard redbook will be diminished.

No doubt Meridian makes a good CDP. It's not a question about it. The question is how does it all fits in together to make it sounds even better than what's pre-recorded and how does it know what artifacts were added in the recording and how does it eliminate it or adds what was not in the recording. It's my overcasting shadows in my brain.

Anyway, another good discussion!

I have no doubt about Meridian quality, but this will be my next CDP if I won lottery.

http://www.accuphase.com/cat/dp-78_e.pdf

Or if my father in law is gracious enough,

I'll have

http://www.accuphase.com/model/dp-800.html
http://www.accuphase.com/model/dc-801.html

reeltrouble1

GV#27 wrote: »

Its pretty simple,Meridians new filter overcomes (or atleast claims to) an inherent flaw found in the response of a normal digital filter. It is not removing any music but an artifact induced into the data stream by the less than ideal response charateristics of digital filters.

How much the new filter contributes to the reported excellent SQ is hard to say.


Bob Stuart is one the smartest digital/DSP audio guys on the planet period.

Gawd, the effin Canadian understands it perfectly..........

RT1

Systems

megasat16 wrote: »

Anyway, another good discussion!

Yes thanks for the noncombative exchange mega.;)