DIYbanter - View Single Post

Daniel Mandic[_2_]

wrote:

Don't overthink this Daniel. Phil has a long history of polluting
newsgroups all over the web with his pigheaded single minded thought
process (like his love of WD40). He's a hateful, vile, cowardly,
foul mouthed internet bully. If you don't agree with him, he will
wish a painful cancer death on you. When I first ran across his
posts, they were so outrageous I thought he was being comically
ironic (and perhaps he is and getting a big laugh out of this). If
someone should ask a dumb question, he will berate their intelligence
and suggest they kill themselves to relieve their burden of ignorance.

Off course, I have seen it, I saw it and I see it...

Phil thinks CDs have no flaws, and I happen to disagree with him.

Theoretically, exactly within the scope (5-20000Hz).

Any other person who disagrees would simply say so and state their
case. But Phil is a true nut job, and since he won't meet anyone
face to face and repeat those same words that he does on the web
(coward), it's sort of fun to just rile him up and disagree with him
now and again.

don't take electronics too religious.... me thinks is the best.

Getting back to the subject, when I was younger, I knew CDs offered
several big advantages (that I pointed out in my first post), but
instead of taking a leap forward beyond a mechanical system of
grooved vinyl and various mechanical needle/cartridge schemes, they
took a small step backwards in fidelity.

Indeed. Taking the costs (Turntable, Tonearm, Pickup and pre-pre -MC
off course- ;-)) for ultimate Vinyl Quality into account... it is by
faaar better in fidelity than any CD-Audio Player. Better than the best
CD-Player by Naim or Linn and Sony and Philips.
CD-Player, even the best, are sounding hollow and narrowed compared
to a fine turntable.

That a digital format
cannot quite equal an archaic electro-mechanical analogue system is
telling. Phil can't or refuses to hear this, and that's fine. The
fact is is that my hearing has diminished to the point where I'm
happy even with MP3s nowadays.

I became moderate, too. My perception range (~18kHz) is biologically
still the same... with more and more knowledge to harmonics and
seperating multiple tracks/instruments in the brain than 20 years
before.

I'm sure his CDP-101 sounds just as good as my Pioneer CD player and
maybe even better, but my point was about the CD format in general,
not the CDP-101 in particular.

The CDP-101 lacks sound (newer technologies...). Many people might
think, that's that (no further playback-technologies) what is
memorized on CD...?
cd-drive, D/A stage, filtering!, op-amps!! etc. `?

On the other hand, why do we need MC-pickups beyond 40kHz? ;-) (there
is max. 16-22kHz writeable/available on a record.... beyond 16kHz with
more distortion than linearity ;-))
Superior harmonics....!
You can revive them, even when recorded with recording-equipment which
can not do more than 20kHz. But to take the effect, you need the other
part(s) of the harmonic(s) -beyond 20kHz- which were effectively
present in the air while recording. So it's obvious you need someting
(at home) which can fill the air vitually the same.

P.S.: I have been very satisfied with the (my) Sony CDP X779ES (w/o
filter mod). One of the best machines for CD-Audio....

--
Daniel Mandic