Audio CD vs 320kbps mp3.. etc.,

[clipto333]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

LBM, how can you compare anything without a point of reference?

Given the same audio system, with the same settings and same situation, if I bring the same song to your car, one on ACD and the other in MP3 (ANY format) you will hear the difference clearly.

If I was walking in GK-1 and you offered me a lift. If I sat in your car and you turned up the volume and asked me "Sam, is this an ACD or a 320 MP3 playing?" I would say "I don't know"

sam, exactly what i was saying. so is this question valid?

Navin, why cant your marantz burn a 7 rupee cd-r? :-) i mean no offence.

LBM, two highly respected persons who know their stuff have said it. just name the person from whom you want to clarify. who are the other audiophiles? ok jb, navinji, b&t please can we have your comment on lbm's question? no offence bro.

TSK, i have never tried but i will now as soon as i can and will let you know.

cheers
clip

p.s. you can also compress wav wav files. you can have double the songs or triple on the cd then if sq is not an issue.

[navin]

Originally Posted by panky12345

.but what LBM is trying to say that if a person cant judge whatss playing (i.e. ACD or an MP3) in a moving car with road noise; whatss the point of not a having MP3 in a high end system??.

if this is true then even the need for ahigh end system is mute. but that is not the argument. the arguemnt is that why dont MOST high end systems include Mp3.

In the case of a watch it is understandable that a Casio has more features than a Rolex (or a Wadia to a Philips EBR*) but (a) one can have a Casio and a Rolex and choose to wear the one that works best for the occasion and (b) a Rolex is bought for snob/jewelrey value.

One car can have only one HU and Car Audio systms should not be bought jsut for snob value. If the answer to this discussion is snobishness I think it is sad. I hope it is not.

*EBR = Everythng but Rotis

[navin]

Originally Posted by clipto333

Navin, why cant your marantz burn a 7 rupee cd-r? :-) i mean no offence.

LBM, two highly respected persons who know their stuff have said it.

I wish it could Clip but it cant the reasons are long and belong to another forum. I import my blanks. Actually an audiophile freind who imports blanks gives me what I need. Gratis. Cheapskate rulez!

[esteem_lover]

Looks like i got the best of both worlds. I have a DVD Hu that can play MP3s & DVD & i also have a 10CD changer that reads only CDDA. He he he. Yeah, there is a little difference, but it also depends on the music you listen to. In a loud, techno environment, the difference is less audible than in a say, a country or jazz number. I prefer CDDA, but I also prefer the convenience of compressed music. I don't listen to MP3s at home, but in a car that little bit of inaudible difference does not make much sense unless you are willing to pack a suitcase for your music. LOL

[santosh.s]

Originally Posted by zucchero

the moment we switched to michael jackson 320 version,midbass vanished to such an extend that the person sittin in the back seat was surprised.
.....
we ALL agreed that the differene was HUGE.

I have trouble believing this, there must be something wrong in the comparison. I can think of a couple of likely possibilities-

1. 320kbps mp3 may not be corresponding to the CD you were playing. It may have been encoded from another CD. That CD or the mp3 itself may be different in terms of any of these- level of dynamic compression, average signal level (gain adjustments), equalization.

2. There may be some equalization or other audio processing being applied by your HU to mp3 but not to CD (or vice versa).

[santosh.s]

I had posted something in the original Clarion HU thread, but I am not too sure as to where it really belongs, so here is the like anyway:

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/produc...tml#post501286 (Clarion HUs discussion!)

[panky12345]

Originally Posted by navin

if this is true then even the need for ahigh end system is mute.

Why?

I wanted to point out that in a high end system, when there is no fine distinction between a ACD and MP3 in a given environment, then why not include the feature. It doesnt mean that there is no distinction between a low end and a high end system.

[abhi182]

question for Sam & LBM:

Here's something I've neever been able to figure out
When it comes to digital media, I want to understand what is the difference between a cheap 2000 Rs. Optical drive vs a 200,000 dedicated DVD player/CD player

OK, let us limit ourselves to say audio players

Scenario A: I take a ACD, rip it to my Hard drives as a lossless FLAC or even better, a pure WAV file
The error correction mechanism inherent to digital file copying would take care of any analog errors arising out of jitter

Now I play this digital stream through say a Burr-Brown PCM 2702 DAC connected to my Amp

Scenario B: I get myself a dedicated reference grade ACD player for 200,000
I then hope the superior transport on the player would minimize analog errors arising out of jitter (or whatever)
This ACD player then feeds this data stream to high grade DACs which then pass the output to my Amp

Now the cost difference between Setup A and seup B is huge...
I know die-hard audiophiles would insists that B is better....But they'll never answer Why....

So I ask you guys..

The analogy gets carried over to DVD players too....

Why should a 400K DVD player be any better than a PC ..any half decent Video card with HDMI support should technically be able to blow the 400K dvd player to oblivion

[panky12345]

Originally Posted by abhi182

...But they'll never answer Why....

This was meant for SAM & LBM; I'm sorry to comment:

The difference will be the same as you perceive by listening the same track in JBL comps and Ghoda chaap chandni chowk speakers.

[abhi182]

The difference will be the same as you perceive by listening the same track in JBL comps and Ghoda chaap chandni chowk speakers.

I usually refrain from flaming, but your post above was exactly the kind of post that invites flaming

Even for a moment I assume that the difference was indeed what you say it is, the question is why?

I have given an explanation why there shouldn't be a difference, rather, I hve even explained why the former should be better

(Coz in scenario I, I know there will be no analog errors...while in Scenario II, I can only hope , and try to minimize (not completely eliminate) analog errors by using superior transport)

And then you come along and simply state that the former is Trash!
Care to explain?

[santosh.s]

I have a few questions:

1. Navinji, you had mentioned somewhere (either in this thread or the original one) about Alpine removing "time alignment" feature. This is more of "purist" kind of feature rather than a part of "bells & whistles", right??

2. Sam (or anybody who knows), I am curious to know how many people actually spend lacs of rupees on each of their components (player, amps, speakers etc). How does yearly sales statistics look like? Especially, it would be good to know how the number has changed now as compared to pre- IT/call center era

3. (this is probably the answer to abhi182's question):
I want to know more about "transport mechanism". If I am not wrong, it is nothing but the equipment that reads optical disks like CDs. I am wondering why the accuracy of that mechanism is so important. As per my (technical) knowledge, accurate transport is needed to achieve accurate "timing" of the audio samples being played. But this accuracy is a must only when we are moving from digital to analog domain or vice versa, which means ADCs or DACs. Since we are focusing on playback (not recording), ADCs should be out of question. The transport is actually only required to be able to maintain sufficient AVERAGE data rate, i.e. somewhere around 1.4Mbps for audio CDs. It is OK even if there is a lot of jitter (variation of sample timings, or the clock as some may call it) as long as it does not cause ERRORS. I believe this is a very easy task for todays CD readers. When the final samples are to be played, it is essential to feed the DAC with great timing precision though. But that too is very easy to achieve with a simple memory buffer which is very accurately controlled by a crystal, and you don't need to spend a bomb for that. Imagine that you are adding samples to the buffer with not-so-precise timing, but picking those samples from the memory accurately. Then, why is there so much of fuss about "accurate" or "precise" transports?? (Am I missing something?)

[clipto333]

Originally Posted by navin

I wish it could Clip but it cant the reasons are long and belong to another forum. I import my blanks. Actually an audiophile freind who imports blanks gives me what I need. Gratis. Cheapskate rulez!

navin, this not the answer to my question.:-) i asked why cant your marantz burn a cd-r? why have marantz excluded other media? there should be some reason. can you shed some light on this?

cheers
clip

[abhi182]

^^yup Santosh..you missing sumthng

You need a DAC to conver the digital data stream to analog output that can then be fed to the Amp...and the qiuality of this DAC is in fact perhaps more important than the quality of the Amps...
After all If you feed the best Audio setup in the world with a bad source, you'll get a bad output
(GIGO :P)

So I'll elaborate my question again

The presumable difference between a cheap and a quality CDP is:
A- Cheap DACs vs Quality DACs (e.g. Burr-brown)
B- Cheap pre-amp vs quality pre-amp
C- Low grade lens mechanism (transport) vs a well dampened superior grade transport

Now let us extend the comparison and compare the quality CDP with a computer based audio setup

With PCs, issue # C is eliminated altogether for the reason given in my previous post...
However, A and B still need to be taken care of ...
most people get bad audio from PCs because they use the low grade on-board sound output

However, if you were to substitute the on-board audio with a high grade external DAC (e.g. M-Audio Audiophile... or some people swear by Zhaolu), that takes care of A & B thus making a PC based setup technically superior to a dedicated ACD player that costs 5-10 times as much...

Now when I present this line of thinking to audiophiles (?), they quickly pounce on me with exactly the kind of answer I got from Panky12345 without presenting any reason from their side

Now since when did being an audiophile become the same as being devoid of reason

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by santosh.s

Sam (or anybody who knows), I am curious to know how many people actually spend lacs of rupees on each of their components (player, amps, speakers etc). How does yearly sales statistics look like? Especially, it would be good to know how the number has changed now as compared to pre- IT/call center era

I'm qualified to give you that answer. Within reason. The country has changed, not slightly, but in leaps and bounds.
Money has changed a whole generation. Today, money lies about 10 years earlier than my generation.
By the time I could afford my own car, I was almost 30. Today, not only is money in the hands of young people, banks are bending over to give them more money, to be returned at their convenience. So a person with the urge to listen to young and popular banging tracks, can not only afford a car, but can afford 50K to a lac without any worries.
Money today has a lower value. Many of us spend, on every saturday night, the cost of a pair of car speakers.

Today, in Asia, India spends some of the highest money on luxury goods, comparable to Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. And geared to cross.

[low_bass_makker]

this discussion is going very good. I like it very much.

Originally Posted by zucchero

after this thread started,lbm and i were curious to know what exactly the 'difference' is.so yesterday we thought to give it a try.lbm got 2 orignal cds(tracy chapman,michael jackson) and their 320 version.while we were about to begin two friends of our drop down and they too decided to give it a shot.
now we were 4 in all.i and lbm were sittin in front.the moment we switched to michael jackson 320 version,midbass vanished to such an extend that the person sittin in the back seat was surprised.the'concerned' person was wearing a turban(his ears were covered) and there were NO SPEAKERS at the back.just imagine how much of the differene i felt when i was sittin right next to the speakers and that too without a turban.
this is my practical experience.we ALL agreed that the differene was HUGE.i just got my dicor few days back.this beast is amazing.inspite being diesel(3000cc) the in cabin noise is absolutely zero.the engine bay and the in cabin has been DAMPENED in such a way that you hardly hear any'NOISES'.
its hard to IMAGINE that after such good dampening a person will not be able to hear a set up consisting of front 3 way comp,a high end hu,2 massive 12" subs and a monster dedicated amp for the subs and the other one for the speaker?????

After the test what happened when I did the blind test . were you able to make it out which one of the either Audio CD or MP3 is play. Two times we tried but you did not make it out and both the times you were wrong.