[JackA]

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-5, Matt Faunce wrote:
wrote:

And as I stated to Dorsey, I never said, or
implied, that such low levels would "sound
better".

Yes you did. Here's the context:

JackA wrote regarding "Sony PCM machines" and the engineers who used them,
"It seems most were concerned about distortion, and used conservative
settings of those machines."

Geoff disagreed.

Excuse me, but Geoff never did any CD mastering, but neither did I, so I found someone (defunct site who did), that is where the Sony machines are mentioned. It also mentions Sony felt losing a few bits out of 65+k (16 bit), was no big deal, so there was NO headroom, approved by Sony.

Jack

Jack continued but didn't answer Geoff's disagreement.

Geoff asked, "So what's this 'Conservative settings' ?"

Then you wrote in response to that question, "Never peaking above -6dBfs?"

So there you have it, you guessed that "Never peaking above -6dBfs" was a
way to avoid or mitigate distortion.

--
Matt

[JackA]

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 3:29:35 AM UTC-5, Matt Faunce wrote:
wrote:

And as I stated to Dorsey, I never said, or
implied, that such low levels would "sound
better".

Yes you did. Here's the context:

JackA wrote regarding "Sony PCM machines" and the engineers who used them,
"It seems most were concerned about distortion, and used conservative
settings of those machines."

Geoff disagreed.

Jack continued but didn't answer Geoff's disagreement.

Geoff asked, "So what's this 'Conservative settings' ?"

Then you wrote in response to that question, "Never peaking above -6dBfs?"

So there you have it, you guessed that "Never peaking above -6dBfs" was a
way to avoid or mitigate distortion.

--
Matt

And THEN, I'm told THEY used to add equalization during the cutting process for vinyl, but Bob Ludwig mentions it was included on the master tape.

You get all kinds of stories, sadly.

http://tapeop.com/interviews/105/bob-ludwig/

Jack

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 16/02/2016 2:20 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/15/2016 8:53 PM, geoff wrote:
Bloody hell. Now it seems there is yet a *different* thing again called
Pure Audio Blu-ray. I just can't keep up !

But vinyl is forever.

Nope, like all plastics it will turn into soup eventually. Polycarbonate
is more stable than vinyl however.

The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

The problem with vinyl is mostly loss of plasticizer.

Either one is likely to be pretty good if they are well-made, certainly a
whole lot better than CD-Rs. But you never really know until they fail.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[JackA]

On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 10:32:08 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 16/02/2016 3:04 p.m., JackA wrote:
On Monday, February 15, 2016 at 8:53:47 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 16/02/2016 2:23 p.m., geoff wrote:
.... passed under the radar for me.

Any supposed benefit over DVD-A or SACD, apart from higher capacity
potentially enabling more types of multi-channel versions available
on a same disc ?

Must find one, probably 'Crime Of the Century' (24/96 apparently) , to
compare with CD and SACD versions I already have. I never did get a
DVD-A capable player , so can't compare that ....

geoff
Bloody hell. Now it seems there is yet a *different* thing again called
Pure Audio Blu-ray. I just can't keep up !
My guess, they just digitally enhance the songs and stick it on a new and improved HQ format. I don't hear ANY remixing of Crime Of The Century, just digital enhancing.

Jack

geoff


Doh - the concept is that there is *no* 'enhancing', remixing, or
remastering.

I have yet to hear a "remix" that didn't have less noise than a "master" tape.
Master tapes are used, they wear, while (multi-track) session tapes are seldom accessed.

Jack

geoff

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 2/17/2016 11:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

The problem with vinyl is mostly loss of plasticizer.

Either one is likely to be pretty good if they are well-made, certainly a
whole lot better than CD-Rs. But you never really know until they fail.

Punched mylar tape?

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[John Williamson]

On 17/02/2016 11:59, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/17/2016 4:21 AM, John Williamson wrote:
Something that hasn't helped on this side of the Atlantic is a law
limiting the power output on the headphone sockets of portable players
so that to hear the programme content above outside noise, the volume
needs to be set at 11.

Apparently this is now a requirement for CE certification of certain
classes of devices. When I reviewed the TASCAM DR-44WL recorder, I
observed that the headphone output started clipping a just-under-0dBFS
sine wave when the volume control was only about half way up. One
consequence of this is that if you're monitoring a recording with
headphones (doesn't everyone?) and need more volume, you may hear
clipping from the headphone amplifier leading you to reduce the record
level when not necessary.

I chastised them for not providing enough headroom in the headphone
amplifier and was pointed to a section of the requirement that they
needed to meet in order to sell the recorder world wide. It was kind of
wishy-washy about what devices had to be so limited and how the limiting
was to be done - I thought it was aimed at what are primarily consumer
devices, which this particular recorder isn't, IMHO.

Yep. The limit with the supplied headphones (usually high efficiency
earbuds with a horrible specification) is 80dB from the maximum input to
the amplifier from the source. (Full scale on digital, 0dB reference
level on tape, and so on.) The law may be incorrectly applied, but if
it's available through normal retail channels, it counts as consumer.

Some of them can be hacked to give decent volume, as the power amp has
lots in reserve, but not all are amenable to hacking. The Rockbox
project is now almost redundant, but worth looking at for older machines.

The idea isn't new. Back when the Walkman was a hot item and portable
cassette players came with earphones (nobody thought that there might be
better 'phones in that day), for a while, Sony was putting a little red
light on their Walkman players that came on when the volume at the
supplied headphones reached what they considered a harmful level. Of
course every kid wanted that red light to come on and stay on.

Of course, and for a short term of listening such as a CD or tape er
day, that was sort of okay. It was when kids started plugging on for
many hours a day that tinnitus and noise related deafness started
appearing in the young, and the Government took steps.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/17/2016 11:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

The problem with vinyl is mostly loss of plasticizer.

Either one is likely to be pretty good if they are well-made, certainly a
whole lot better than CD-Rs. But you never really know until they fail.

Punched mylar tape?

Mylar is good, doesn't get insect infestations, and it's a single material
so there is no interface between materials. It's at interfaces where the
worst problems occur.

I would think polystrene injection-molded 45s would be more stable than
vinyl pressings, at least until you started playing them. No worries about
plasticizer loss.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

On 18/02/2016 3:25 a.m., JackA wrote:

Excuse me, but Geoff never did any CD mastering,


Well at least not on an old Sony PCM-Fxxxx

but neither did I,

That's for sure.

so I found someone (defunct site who did), that is where the Sony
machines are mentioned. It also mentions Sony felt losing a few bits out
of 65+k (16 bit), was no big deal, so there was NO headroom, approved
by Sony.


Que ?

geoff

[JackA]

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 6:28:04 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2016 3:25 a.m., JackA wrote:

Excuse me, but Geoff never did any CD mastering,


Well at least not on an old Sony PCM-Fxxxx

but neither did I,

That's for sure.

so I found someone (defunct site who did), that is where the Sony
machines are mentioned. It also mentions Sony felt losing a few bits out
of 65+k (16 bit), was no big deal, so there was NO headroom, approved
by Sony.


Que ?

geoff

So, how do they create 5.1 Surround Sound without having to use session tapes?...
http://news.acousticsounds.com/post....-the-dark-side

Jack

[JackA]

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 1:55:56 PM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/17/2016 11:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

The problem with vinyl is mostly loss of plasticizer.

Either one is likely to be pretty good if they are well-made, certainly a
whole lot better than CD-Rs. But you never really know until they fail.

Punched mylar tape?

Mylar is good, doesn't get insect infestations, and it's a single material
so there is no interface between materials.

Correct, it's non organic. However, Mylar is sometime laminated with other materials...

http://www.axemcn.com/?News/DMDINTRODUCTION.html

Jack

It's at interfaces where the
worst problems occur.

I would think polystrene injection-molded 45s would be more stable than
vinyl pressings, at least until you started playing them. No worries about
plasticizer loss.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

On 18/02/2016 12:56 p.m., JackA wrote:
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 6:28:04 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2016 3:25 a.m., JackA wrote:

Excuse me, but Geoff never did any CD mastering,

Well at least not on an old Sony PCM-Fxxxx

but neither did I,
That's for sure.

so I found someone (defunct site who did), that is where the Sony
machines are mentioned. It also mentions Sony felt losing a few bits out
of 65+k (16 bit), was no big deal, so there was NO headroom, approved
by Sony.

Que ?

geoff
So, how do they create 5.1 Surround Sound without having to use session tapes?...
http://news.acousticsounds.com/post....-the-dark-side

Jack

Mas 'que' ?

geoff

[Trevor]

On 18/02/2016 3:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 16/02/2016 2:20 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/15/2016 8:53 PM, geoff wrote:
Bloody hell. Now it seems there is yet a *different* thing again called
Pure Audio Blu-ray. I just can't keep up !

But vinyl is forever.

Nope, like all plastics it will turn into soup eventually. Polycarbonate
is more stable than vinyl however.

The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

Not at all important. You do realise with a commercial compact disk the
pits are pressed into the polycarbonate, and the reflective layer can be
replaced. Whats more the reflective layer of some disks is 24k gold, and
is far more stable than vinyl.


The problem with vinyl is mostly loss of plasticizer.

Either one is likely to be pretty good if they are well-made, certainly a
whole lot better than CD-Rs. But you never really know until they fail.

Yes CDR's are a whole different ball game, and can't be relied on at any
time.

Trevor.

[Trevor]

On 17/02/2016 8:21 PM, John Williamson wrote:
Something that hasn't helped on this side of the Atlantic is a law
limiting the power output on the headphone sockets of portable players
so that to hear the programme content above outside noise, the volume
needs to be set at 11.

And those with even minor hearing loss are still in trouble.

Trevor.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 18/02/2016 3:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 16/02/2016 2:20 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/15/2016 8:53 PM, geoff wrote:
Bloody hell. Now it seems there is yet a *different* thing again called
Pure Audio Blu-ray. I just can't keep up !

But vinyl is forever.

Nope, like all plastics it will turn into soup eventually. Polycarbonate
is more stable than vinyl however.

The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

Not at all important. You do realise with a commercial compact disk the
pits are pressed into the polycarbonate, and the reflective layer can be
replaced. Whats more the reflective layer of some disks is 24k gold, and
is far more stable than vinyl.

You'd think so, but is anyone out there resputtering discs with damaged
aluminum? I have a bunch of discs from the PDO plant where contaminants
in the styrene attacked the metallization layer twenty years after manufacture.
You'd think they could be etched and resputtered in theory, but has anyone
ever done that?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[sTeeVee]

Some new details have emerged about a "nanocrystaline glass structure" set to revolutionize storage longevity theoretically into the "billions of years." That should lower the music (data) loss stress level a wee tad.

[JackA]

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 7:45:56 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2016 12:56 p.m., JackA wrote:
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 6:28:04 PM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 18/02/2016 3:25 a.m., JackA wrote:

Excuse me, but Geoff never did any CD mastering,

Well at least not on an old Sony PCM-Fxxxx

but neither did I,
That's for sure.

so I found someone (defunct site who did), that is where the Sony
machines are mentioned. It also mentions Sony felt losing a few bits out
of 65+k (16 bit), was no big deal, so there was NO headroom, approved
by Sony.

Que ?

geoff
So, how do they create 5.1 Surround Sound without having to use session tapes?...
http://news.acousticsounds.com/post....-the-dark-side

Jack

Mas 'que' ?

More Than? Less Than? English please.

Here are facts. Take Bachman-Turner Overdrive albums. I have ALL CDs of one album, Not Fragile. I audio enhanced the Polydor (initial one) CD and it sound like the recent 2015 one that MANY applud. That tells me they just digitally enhance what was previously issued.

Even the Top Dogs, like Kevin Gray, I think Doug Sax mentioned him, still sounds bland on a "gold" Audio Fidelity CD.

HOWEVER, there is also a 5.1 edition (Canada based), and I'm guessing that required session tapes for "Surround Sound". I'm no expert with Surround, but isn't it 4+ discrete channels?

Jack


geoff

[John Williamson]

On 18/02/2016 15:14, sTeeVee wrote:
Some new details have emerged about a "nanocrystaline glass structure" set to revolutionize storage longevity theoretically into the "billions of years." That should lower the music (data) loss stress level a wee tad.

As it's an optically writeable format, it's likely that the storage life
will be limited by cosmic ray exposure causing uncorrectable errors and
dependent on density. Erasure could also be accidentally done by
exposure to sufficient light energy, so setting all the bits to the same
value.

It's a vast improvement on current technology, and will probably outlast
us all, though.

The principle isn't new, and someone was selling a "CD burner" that used
CD sized quartz discs to hold roughly a CD's worth of data a while ago.
I don't remember who marketed it, but the research was done by Hitachi.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[geoff]

On 19/02/2016 4:14 a.m., sTeeVee wrote:
Some new details have emerged about a "nanocrystaline glass structure" set to revolutionize storage longevity theoretically into the "billions of years." That should lower the music (data) loss stress level a wee tad.

Just don't drop yer disc !

geoff

[Trevor]

On 19/02/2016 12:20 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 18/02/2016 3:04 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 16/02/2016 2:20 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/15/2016 8:53 PM, geoff wrote:
Bloody hell. Now it seems there is yet a *different* thing again called
Pure Audio Blu-ray. I just can't keep up !

But vinyl is forever.

Nope, like all plastics it will turn into soup eventually. Polycarbonate
is more stable than vinyl however.

The problem with pressed CDs is the interface between the aluminum layer and
the polycarbonate base. If that can be kept stable, you're good to go.

Not at all important. You do realise with a commercial compact disk the
pits are pressed into the polycarbonate, and the reflective layer can be
replaced. Whats more the reflective layer of some disks is 24k gold, and
is far more stable than vinyl.

You'd think so, but is anyone out there resputtering discs with damaged
aluminum?

Not the issue, since there are probably plenty of other disks available
now without the bother. The point is you CAN do it 100's of years from
now if you needed to.


I have a bunch of discs from the PDO plant where contaminants
in the styrene attacked the metallization layer twenty years after manufacture.
You'd think they could be etched and resputtered in theory, but has anyone
ever done that?

It's simply a cost issue. The only question atm is are the digital files
still available to make more? Or are there working copies which can be
ripped before you even think of how much a disk repair might be.

Trevor.