Upsampling DACS: Take the Pepsi Challenge

Albert (my name is George, BTW) there is a real problem with vinyl. In another discussion thread on vinyl versus digital, there is a lot of REAL information from recording engineers regarding the inherent limitations of vinyl (mostly) and why it sounds better to some, worse to others. Basically, if I recall correctly, there seemed to be a consensus of opinion that there is a very vocal minority out there in the real world that prefer analog. (You might find the same type of minority out there that prefer tube over transistor). I don't know how good your hearing is, but I was blessed with perfect pitch and great hearing. I can hear things that others can't who are sitting right beside me. Now, this begs the question - do I hear these things because of genetically superior hearing, does my brain just process the information better, or was I actively listening to the music and the other person passively listening? As a follow-up question: is this gender based? I don't believe that it is gender based at all and enough real science has gone into the quest for that answer. The first part of our hearing to USUALLY suffer degredation is reception of the high frequency pitches. If you've ever operated an air gun, etc. without ear protection you might notice a ringing in your ears afterwards. Not good. Repetition of the same stress to your hearing over time will result in your loss of the ability to pick up certain high frequencies. The one thing that vinyl does is truncate the high frequencies because of the way they were rolled off or limited in the recording process. I've picked this up since the first time I listened to vinyl, more years ago than I care to admit. I personally like the higher frequencies to shine through on my music (this is why I prefer digital and I have done enough A/B testing on my own equipment to validate my opinion). But I also want a balance throughout my hearing range and hopefully some impact caused by subsonic frequency air displacement. So vinyl does not recreate the high frequencies that I look for, but it does the rest fairly well and it still offers constant streaming information to my brain. But it does not offer the wide dynamic range necessary to recreate a true "lifelike" representation or recreation of the musical event. Neither does digital - yet. It is very close. Everybody's hearing is different. Digital can reproduce those high frequencies that I am listening for while vinyl cannot. I seriously suspect that this is why some people get what is referred to as "CD fatigue." The higher frequencies are reproduced (above what is reproduced by vinyl) causing an adverse impact on the most sensitive frequency reception range of hearing. Suppose you have the best audio gear that money can buy - either analog or digital. I think analog offers the best state of the art at this point in time. Why? Analog is in its old age and is a very mature technology. Digital is in its infancy. As algorithms mature and newer hardware generations turn over, digital will eventually reach an even keel with analog in two to three years at the high end of equipment. But very quickly digital will surpass the vinyl recreation of what your brain perceives as a constant or unimpeded and fluid stream of information that we call music. Then we will have the trickle down effect into the mainstream or affordable digital equipment lines or models. As we learn more about digital reproduction of music and upsampling or oversampling (and how the brain processes these digital bit streams), the one thing that vinyl can NOT do is offer the incredible dynamic transients that digital can. And this will eventually make digital more "lifelike" or offer a more realistic recreation of a live musical event. But this is a double edged sword. Your amps and preamps may not be able to keep pace with the dynamics that the digital signal will bring forth. Speed will be the essence. In the end, right now, both methods of musical recreation can offer satisfaction to the listener. Depends on how your brain processes the input. The key is to find balance between the individual components that make up your system so that it is optimized for your listening preference. Right now vinyl is ahead by one run in the bottom of the ninth but digital's clean-up hitter is coming to the plate with nobody out and the bases loaded.

Plsl, how nice for you, that's almost like bragging. Really, if you're married, must you hog single young ladies who are interested in audio? I'd like to meet one sometime. Anyway, it doesn't prove that these represent the majority of the women in the lives of the rest of us male audiophiles, though. Just makes us wish we were you. let me guess, your last name is Heffner?................George, my brain missed the part where you answered my questions about your criticisms of my oversampled views on women and audio. Regarding vinyl, you are wrong on basic points about the treble bandwidth capability of vinyl, and also abot the portrayal of the dynamic contrast (both micro and macro) of vinyl, over the best of CD. I'll leave it to Albert to lay into you about that (I really wouldn't want to be you right about now, that's for sure...heh heh).....................Regarding your hearing, I have pretty decent hearing, myself. How far away from, say a 32 inch crt TV, can you hear it's 15.6 kHz sweep noise? I bet I can hear it farther away than you can (and around corners, down hallways, and on many pop recordings and movie soundtracks), and I'm not in the habit of using air guns, and I always wear earplugs for any activity even remotely noisy.

Gmkane. I appreciate your answer, I have copied and pasted the part of your statement that I ABSOLUTELY agree with: Suppose you have the best audio gear that money can buy - either analog or digital. I think analog offers the best state of the art at this point in time. Why? Analog is in its old age and is a very mature technology. Digital is in its infancy. As algorithms mature and newer hardware generations turn over, digital will eventually reach an even keel with analog in two to three years at the high end of equipment. But very quickly digital will surpass the vinyl recreation of what your brain perceives as a constant or unimpeded and fluid stream of information that we call music. I (as posted on other threads) would love to have CD offer what it has as strengths, and have what L.P. has as well. Since we cannot have both, we must each decide if it is worth the effort to obtain what either format (at it's limit) has over the other, and then press our system out to the limit of that technology. As I already stated, I have been to the limit with both formats, and made my choice. I am pleased to read your comments, and believe your opinions to be factual and informative. Thanks!

Oh well, he isn't in the mood. Maybe next time...

Carl, first of all if you're right about something you're right. Just because you were wrong on an issue (that Resolution Audio gentleman's explanation seems to bear that out) doesn't mean that you were wrong on everything. Secondly I was remiss in calling your remarks sophomoric. They were sophomoric and neanderthal. I haven't run into a total throwback like you for quite a while. And it has nothing to do with PC. It has to do with real world experience working with women physicists, educators, engineers, physicians, secretaries, medical personnel, research and tech "weenies", and many of them stereo lovers. From all economic strata. Having two grown girls that love listening to music on a high end stereo. Reading remarks like those from Plsl and his wife, above. Selling some equipment to a woman who "has it all" and just happens to listen to a high end stereo. You cannot make crass generalizations and expect to have them received as gospel when they are just pure prejudicial rubbish. Ever visit a private and predominately women's college or university? Ever look into dorm room after dorm room and see the stereo equipment in the private rooms? I'm not talking about boom boxes here. I'm talking about fine equipment. (BTW - my answer to that question is yes. About a hundred times). But as not all men are stereo lovers not all women are not stereo lovers. And YOU MISS THE POINT in the discussion. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE REPRODUCTION OF THE LIVE MUSICAL EVENT OR AT LEAST THE CLOSEST REPRESENTATION OF THAT LIVE EVENT IN TWO CHANNEL STEREO; AND WHY DIGITAL WILL EVENTUALLY SURPASS ANALOG IN THE ABILITY TO RECREATE THE WIDE DYNAMIC TRANSIENTS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE BRAIN RECOGNIZE A MORE REALISTIC INTERPRETATION OF A RECORDED MUSICAL EVENT. Something that you were unable to do. Now tell me, you've forgotten how to read too, right? Where did I mention HT? To offer your jaundiced view of the world according to Carl and to espouse the notion that your bigotry is the truth is not just nonsense - it is lunacy. But I respect your right to be a bigot. You do it better than most.