[Jukebox-list] Audio question

Sun Jul 22 17:57:08 PDT 2007

What it really comes to it what sounds good to *you*.  As Frank stated in 
his post after mine "Forgot to tell you that most of the source material 
on my iPod is vinyl".  Well now we have come full circle, haven't we?

For all intents and purposes for vinyl, we can assume that the ipod will 
have something near perfect reproduction, then running through a juke box 
audio system (with appropriate interfacing and filtering) - yes, you 
should get something that sounds almost just like the juke box playing a 
vinyl record.  Assuming that was what you were going for.

What I pointed out before is the fact that the juke box audio system (the 
cartridge, the amp and the speakers) was designed in a era where vinyl was 
the primary source of audio.  Although some juke boxes have very good 
audio systems and some don't, these systems were never designed to play CD 
quality audio with the wide dynamic range (this being the extreme highs 
and extreme lows not being reduced in volume by any significant amount) 
that many MP3's and cd's have.

As with any audio system, it will only sound as good at the weakest link, 
be that the speakers, the amp or the source material.  That being said, if 
you played CD quality audio from an ipod and feed it through a juke box 
audio system, within the dynamic limits of the juke box (how faithfully 
the amp and speakers reproduce the extreme highs and lows), it should 
sound pretty good.  Or at least we can pretty much make the assumption 
that it will sound far better that the cartridge and vinyl record.  Again 
the weakest link defines the overall quality of the system.

There was some mention before of digitally reproduced sound not being as 
good because it is sampled and that the tube amps have a "warm" sound to 
them.  I have heard these arguments before.  Again what it really comes 
down is what sounds good to *you*.

The "warm" sound of a tube amp is not anything that I have ever been able 
to notice.  But, if a tube amp does somehow "warms" the quality of the 
audio then it is not faithfully reproducing the audio source - it is 
actually distorting the audio in this case, even if the distortion might 
have a pleasant effect.  The quality of any audio system is defined by how 
it well it reproduces an audio source.

As for the digitally sampling versus 100% analog, there are some arguments 
here but the reality is that no 100% analog system is able to reproduce an 
audio source *100% perfectly*.  But, most of time for a quality audio 
system, any imperfections are not anything that human hearing can discern.

In similar way digitally produced audio (CD, MP3, etc.) is not 100% 
perfect either.  Yes, technically speaking, it is true that by using 
digital sampling extremely minute portions of the audio are lost.  But 
when we are talking about CD quality digital audio, the reality is that 
what is lost is not anything that most human beings can discern.

So as for Ron Rich's original question:

    "The discussion of the Ipod has prompted some questions in my mind-- I 
have been told that a GOOD vinyl pressing (along with a good reproduction 
system) is able to re-produce many more "harmonics" then any "digital" 
method, as digital just "samples", and vinyl "has it all in there". Any 
opinions here??"

What is "lost" in digital reproduction is so insignificantly small 
compared to what is gained in overall sound quality the comparison really 
doesn't matter.  You can say "it is all in there" if you want, and you 
would be right, but if the digital recording sounds better, again it 
doesn't really matter.

Yes, with a GOOD vinyl pressing along with a good reproduction system is 
possible to get very good sound.  Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" on 
vinyl is a very good example of this.  But digital reproduction gets us as 
close to the quality of the original studio source as possible.  The main 
advantage to producing audio digitally is that copies do not degrade in 
the coping process.  With analog processes every copy of a copy looses 
some quality.

In the analog days, you had the original studio tapes.  An edited tape 
copy was made from these.  Then the edited copy was used to make a vinyl 
pressing original that was then used to stamp out vinyl records.  So that 
is four copies of a copy when you count the final vinyl record.  Quality 
gets lost in this process for every copy of a copy made.

Today, everything is digital.  Digital audio, like what is on a CD, is 
just a whole bunch of numbers that define the audio recording.

In the studio, the original studio source recording is digital.  Copies 
are made digitally for editing and recording to CDs.  The digital process 
had the advantage that nothing gets lost when copying a copy of a copy 
because really we are just copying a bunch of numbers that define the 
audio (hence the term "digital", like digits).  The numbers don't change 
when copied so in the end we get something extremely close to the quality 
of the studio original source.

Ran also asked:

     "Along those lines, many moons ago, when I was doing some work for the 
local RoweAMi distrib here, Rowe came out with what they called "True 
Dimensional Sound" (TDS) ( I have heard this device called a "ringer" 
also). This unit was added in between the (DAC) output of the CD 
mechanism, and the input (one stage past the input of the old magnetic 
cart.) of the amp (same place the DAC originally entered)--Nothing else 
was changed. They added this unit to the jukebox for a number of years, 
then it "disappeared".
   When the factory rep demo'd it, I could detect a difference--however it
did not "sound better", just different. Of course, my ears were bad
then--and have become worse."

Probably this device was reducing the dynamic range of the audio coming 
out of the CD player so as not to overpower the speakers of the juke box 
when a very low note was played from the CD player.  Overall though I'd 
say that even though this was nessasary device, it sounds like marking 
over hyped it and didn't understand the device was really doing.  Sadly 
marketing departments do this a lot.

    "Is there any subjective method to determine what is really best in 
music reproduction? --or is it a matter of "hype", and what you have been 
led to believe, by sales persons interested only in selling one product 
over another???"

When is come to audio quality and what sounds best, "subjective" is the 
key word here.  A manufacturer can make the best audio system possible, 
with all of the specs to prove that the system faithfully reproduces the 
audio source, but if the customer doesn't like the sound of the system 
then it does matter.

Ray Finch

  > Ron,
> In theory the perfect analogue system will be better than the perfect
> digital (can there be such a thing?) system. This is because there will
> always be something missing in a sampled system, a perfect analogue system
> will capture everything. In practice of course, the current state of the art
> in the two technologies results in similar (debatable, no doubt!)
> performance.
>
> There are lot's of things one can do to any system to change the sound. The
> big question is does it make it better or worse or just different? Usually
> it's a case of just different - as Wes has pointed out the beauty of the
> sound is in the ear of the beholder. I once had a customer choosing between
> a W1800 and an AMI I. He got me to put the same record on both machines -
> they certainly sounded different, both good, but different. He preferred
> (and bought) the 1800, but I actually preferred the AMI.
>
> I guess the only real way to judge the best music reproduction would be to
> listen to a live performance (with your eyes closed) while it was being
> recorded and then listen to the recording. This would have to be done in the
> same venue, under the same conditions and soon enough after the live event
> that you didn't forget the first sound!  Full of practical difficulties I
> think.... just listen to whatever sounds good to YOU!!
>
> Adrian.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ron Rich" <ronnnrich at yahoo.com>
> To: <jukebox-list at lists.netlojix.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 8:06 PM
> Subject: [Jukebox-list] Audio question
>
>
> Hi All,
>  The discussion of the Ipod has prompted some questions in my mind--
>  I have been told that a GOOD vinyl pressing (along with a good
> reproduction system) is able to re-produce many more "harmonics" then any
> "digital" method, as digital just "samples", and vinyl "has it all in
> there". Any opinions here??
>  Along those lines, many moons ago, when I was doing some work for the
> local RoweAMi distrib here, Rowe came out with what they called "True
> Dimensional Sound" (TDS) ( I have heard this device called a "ringer" also).
> This unit was added in between the (DAC) output of the CD mechanism, and the
> input (one stage past the input of the old magnetic cart.) of the amp (same
> place the DAC originally entered)--Nothing else was changed. They added this
> unit to the jukebox for a number of years, then it "disappeared".
>  When the factory rep demo'd it, I could detect a difference--however it
> did not "sound better", just different. Of course, my ears were bad
> then--and have become worse.
>  Is there any subjective method to determine what is really best in music
> reproduction? --or is it a matter of "hype", and what you have been led to
> believe, by sales persons interested only in selling one product over
> another???
>  Ron Rich
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Choose the right car based on your needs.  Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car
> Finder tool.
> _______________________________________________
> Jukebox-list mailing list
> Jukebox-list at lists.netlojix.com
> http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/jukebox-list
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.12/910 - Release Date: 21/07/2007
> 15:52
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jukebox-list mailing list
> Jukebox-list at lists.netlojix.com
> http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/jukebox-list
>