Analog playback on computer.

Uberdine, and every one else who responded, I know nothing about computers, but I got a "Geek" who knows everything. When I ask him a question, he gives me that look which says "You wouldn't even know after I told you". Back when Stereophile was running articles on computer cards I bought what they recommended, and he installed them, plus I have a "Music Streamer" for the output; economical, but it works very well.

What amazes me the most about "computer audio" is the price ratio when compared to regular audio. We had to spend at least 1K, or more to get the slightest improvement, but in computer audio, we're talking hundreds, as opposed to thousands of dollars; consequently, I'm looking at any computer improvement I can make.


Enjoy the music.

orpheus10, how are you?
I have never tried this kind of digital processing so it was interesting to read. The common opinion is that once it enters digital domain something is lost and can't be recovered. I would need top of the line equipment including computer to form my own opinion. Not a completely correct analogy, but when you translate from one spoken language into another something is always lost. If you know well more than one language, try it especially poetry.

Inna, I've got a tweaked out rig that includes things like: Incognito Tone Arm Rewire, "Deluxe Groove Tracer Subplatter", and other stuff,plus Grado Sonata cartridge, perfectly installed.

I recorded before and after the improvements; therefore I was cognizant of every minute difference, including "nuance" of old favorite records.

My "Geek" explained the process to me, and it was similar to the process used in "Star Trek" when they get beamed up; the molecular breakdown and regeneration. Although he explained it to me, I couldn't even explain it to myself; nevertheless, it works.

Although the before and after the tweaks is quite apparent, there is absolutely no difference between listening to the music on computer playback, and spinning a record.

I know this is true on my rig, I just wondered if it was the same on others rigs. I know I made some improvements on my computer, but I forgot what they were. If improvements are necessary to get this level of playback, you can inquire the same people who responded to my post.


Enjoy the music.

Inna, the proper word was "analogous", not similar to that used on "Star Trek"; a big difference, but I couldn't spell analogous at the time, and used a word that I thought was "similar". There is a world of difference between the two in my explanation of analog to digital.

In digital,there is no such thing as "left" and "right" channel, so how does all that stuff get back together; not to far from "Star Trek" is it?


Enjoy the music.

Orpheus10, I myself have no need for this, I use Nakamichi 682ZX cassette deck to make compilations from records and cds, I am just curious. Speaking of Star Trek, it's a fantasy, at least for now. One day they may be capable of doing energy/matter conversion with living beings..I don't want to think about it. However, philosophically speaking, I doubt that this kind of reconstruction would yield the exact original state. Quantum signature would be different. Now what the heck did I just say?