|
|
CD transports and resonance
For those without scopes reports of building experiments will be aural. That's
a fact of life. Not really. It is a choice that you (and some others) make. I think both statements are true. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
It is completely reasonable for people to ask for advice and information.
However it is, in turn, completely reasonable for those who are invited to assist to point out what may be required in order for progress to be made. That's quite fair. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
When we ask you to do the real *listening* tests, it is not in
expectation that you will come back here with some wonderful new scientific principle that we were unaware of, but in the hope that you can move your understanding on a bit. Patronising? I hope you don't see it that way. Hello Don - Yes - that does make things clearer. No, as you say, that isn't patronising. It is, as you say, helpful. I apologise if I seem to have misconstrued this (and to Jim as well, who always makes helpful points). === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
1) this ng is for those who measure with equipment and who measure with their
ears 1. Most emphatically no. Listen any way you like, and post whatever opinions you like, but if you announce the discovery of some effect that the rest of us believe to be impossible - be prepared to defend it, not moan about being challenged. (DP) Well, this ng most emphatically IS for people who measure how they like. You are quite right to say "If you want us to believe a statement, supply measurements and proof" No problem. But I believe I was saying from the start "I have made an observation which I believe I hear and I have no idea why, plus I don't have measuring equipment so I'm not in a position to measure it. Has anybody else observed such a thing". If you want to say "I don't believe you" that's fine. In purely scientific terms the burden of proof lies with the person making an assertion - fair enough. This doesn't make a statement like "I have always found girls with first names ending in the letter a to be more passionate" entirely uninteresting. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
4) to simultaneously ask for scientific methods and make fundamental mistakes
in measuring the intelligence of others is hypoctitical. 4. Is it not fair to call somebody who wilfully fails to follow a method he knows to be the only one that yields a true result unintelligent? "willfully fails to measure" - is this the same as "does not have measuring equipment"? "the only method" - you have yourself said that in audio we both measure and listen "someone who wilfully fails to measure is unintelligent". Correct me if I appear to be wrong here, but I thought that the most widely accepted methods for measuring intelligence were intelligence tests. I'd just include a statement from one of the most compulsive measurers on the ng which is about as hypocritical as you are likely to find: "Character assassination seems to be the only debating tool you tubie vinylite bigots have left" === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
In article ,
Andy Evans wrote: Since we know in advance that there are those on the ng wthout measuring equipment, to imply that they should not have made a statement without measured data would be effectively to gag them. They have as much right to make observations as the next man, so I would regard gagging ng members as wholly unacceptable, even elitist. Err, no one can 'gag' anyone on this newsgroup. However, you don't need any particularly specialised equipment to do comparison testing at its most basic level. All that's needed really is not to have sight of what the combination is you're testing. After all, if the 'improvement' really is there, it will disappear after the 'tweak' is reversed, and re-appear when it's reinstated. -- *The more I learn about women, the more I love my car Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
CD transports and resonance
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Tat Chan wrote: Actually, CD uses a form of the Reed Solomon code. Though the Hamming code would provide error correction as well. Not sure of all the details, but yes IIRC it is a form of cross interleaved RS code. I think this is a 'block' code equivalent to a hamming code. I haven't done this in a while, but IIRC the Reed Solomon code is a type of BCH code, which itself is a cyclic code. However the channel bit stream is encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc. did you mean 'cross interleaved code' when you said 'encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc'? Slainte, Jim |
CD transports and resonance
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Tat Chan wrote: Rob wrote: Rob, getting the 'data off the disk' in a reliable manner is the only thing that matters in this context. If the output stream of 1s and 0s from an undamped and damped transport is exactly the same, then the damping doesn't make a difference. Slight quibble. The above assumes we can then convey the bitstream to the DAC with no unintended spurious effects. The most well-publicised version of this is 'jitter' in various forms. Yes, I thought the OP (Andy) was asking if there was a difference in using the same transport in a damped and undamped mode, so I assume the same DAC was being used. So, depending on how well the DAC handles jitter, there may or may not be an audible difference even if the bitstream from the damped and undamped transports differ slightly. In principle this should not be a problem. In practice it probably is not a problem for most systems/disc. But it *might* be a problem in some cases where the player/disc/DAC arrangement is unusually poor for some reason. or if the DAC doesn't handle jitter well ... :) |
CD transports and resonance
On 08 Nov 2004 10:06:52 GMT, ohawker (Andy
Evans) wrote: 1) this ng is for those who measure with equipment and who measure with their ears 1. Most emphatically no. Listen any way you like, and post whatever opinions you like, but if you announce the discovery of some effect that the rest of us believe to be impossible - be prepared to defend it, not moan about being challenged. (DP) Well, this ng most emphatically IS for people who measure how they like. You are quite right to say "If you want us to believe a statement, supply measurements and proof" No problem. But I believe I was saying from the start "I have made an observation which I believe I hear and I have no idea why, plus I don't have measuring equipment so I'm not in a position to measure it. Has anybody else observed such a thing". If you want to say "I don't believe you" that's fine. In purely scientific terms the burden of proof lies with the person making an assertion - fair enough. This doesn't make a statement like "I have always found girls with first names ending in the letter a to be more passionate" entirely uninteresting. I think the question here is what constitutes a measurement. If you have hung a scope on an output, you have made a measurement. If you have made a double blind, level matched test between two items, and found a significant (chi squared) difference, then you have made a measurement every bit as valid as the first. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
CD transports and resonance
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In principle this should not be a problem. In practice it probably is not a problem for most systems/disc. But it *might* be a problem in some cases where the player/disc/DAC arrangement is unusually poor for some reason. surely (massive) jitter from the *disc* end of things would manifest as read errors rather than jitter in the output stream? |
CD transports and resonance
I'm talking about listening in an environment where tester bias is not a
factor. (DP) That's a fair point. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
I think the question here is what constitutes a measurement. If you
have hung a scope on an output, you have made a measurement. If you have made a double blind, level matched test between two items, and found a significant (chi squared) difference, then you have made a measurement every bit as valid as the first. Again, a fair point. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
you don't need any particularly specialised equipment to do comparison testing
at its most basic level. All that's needed really is not to have sight of what the combination is you're testing. After all, if the 'improvement' really is there, it will disappear after the 'tweak' is reversed, and re-appear when it's reinstated This is what Don is saying, and I think it's entirely reasonable. Clearly I could do this with some third party, so I accept that I have been "wilfully negligent" purely in listening (without going into the question of measuring equipment). I'm not sure what third party I can press gang into this - I have nobody handy, but it's a reasonable point that listening tests can be done much better than I did. === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
"Andy Evans" wrote in message
CD transports are designed to tolerate such stuff ( vibration et al ). How on earth do you think one can work in a car otherwise ? Hello there - I never said it didn't work - that's not the issue. Also the changes are subtle, and not something you'd have a hope in hell of hearing in a car. As I've constantly said, this is quite paradoxical. No, it's imaginary. I suppose you are enjoying all the attention you are getting, Andy. |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Tat Chan
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Tat Chan wrote: Actually, CD uses a form of the Reed Solomon code. Though the Hamming code would provide error correction as well. Not sure of all the details, but yes IIRC it is a form of cross interleaved RS code. I think this is a 'block' code equivalent to a hamming code. I haven't done this in a while, but IIRC the Reed Solomon code is a type of BCH code, which itself is a cyclic code. I'm struggling to recall the details as it is ages since I read the info. However I think the above is correct. Also, the data is processed via 'EFM' (8 to 4 modulation). This essentially adds 6 extra bits of redundancy to each 8bit byte of data. Thus redundancy (for error correction) is added at more than one level in the process. However the channel bit stream is encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc. did you mean 'cross interleaved code' when you said 'encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc'? Not quite. The interleaving and RS is one 'layer' of this. The interleaving being to make that level's redundancy be for different sets of 'bits' than the EFM additional bits. The process involves at least 2 or 3 'levels' of re-encoding or re-arranging of the data. The details are in the relevant Philips papers (and some in my textbook on this) but I can't recall all the details! Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Ian Molton
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In principle this should not be a problem. In practice it probably is not a problem for most systems/disc. But it *might* be a problem in some cases where the player/disc/DAC arrangement is unusually poor for some reason. surely (massive) jitter from the *disc* end of things would manifest as read errors rather than jitter in the output stream? The usual academic response. "Depends what you mean by..." :-) Jitter when trying to read the channel bit steam off the disc might mean some bits were lost or repeated. However (in principle) the player might accomodate that, but in doing so end up jittering the 'correct' bit series it outputs so much as to annoy or confuse a following DAC/receiver. So "yes or no"... :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
"Don Pearce" wrote in message
Andy surprises me rather with his claims because he is fairly uniquely positioned in his psychological training to understand the reasoning and processes, yet chooses to ignore all his training and experience. IME its not unusual to find people with psychological training who seem to be completely oblivious to the need for well-designed subjective testing of audio gear. Bruce Richman over in RAO seems to be one such person, and Michael M. Gindi of the late unlamented FI magazine would be naother. |
CD transports and resonance
I'd particularly like to thank Jim, Don and Dave Plowman for their
contributions to this thread - they have been helpful, patient and constructive, and I've certainly learned quite a lot about the whole theory and practice of measurement in the contentious area of what we call 'audio'. Andy === Andy Evans === Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links. |
CD transports and resonance
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:30:27 +1100, Tat Chan
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Tat Chan wrote: Actually, CD uses a form of the Reed Solomon code. Though the Hamming code would provide error correction as well. Not sure of all the details, but yes IIRC it is a form of cross interleaved RS code. I think this is a 'block' code equivalent to a hamming code. I haven't done this in a while, but IIRC the Reed Solomon code is a type of BCH code, which itself is a cyclic code. However the channel bit stream is encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc. did you mean 'cross interleaved code' when you said 'encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc'? It's a cross-interleaved Reed-Solomon (CIRC) code, using eight to fourteen (EFM) modulation. Pick your preferred alphabet soup! :-_ -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
CD transports and resonance
|
CD transports and resonance
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:30:27 +1100, Tat Chan wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: However the channel bit stream is encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc. did you mean 'cross interleaved code' when you said 'encoded on a number of levels between the sample data and the disc'? It's a cross-interleaved Reed-Solomon (CIRC) code, using eight to fourteen (EFM) modulation. Pick your preferred alphabet soup! :-_ All that work to correct burst errors (CIRC) and ensure that the bits can be read off the disc in a practical way (EFM), eh? I suppose the mathematicians laid the foundation to ensure the data on the disc would be self-correcting (up to a certain number of bits) and the engineers found a practical way of getting the data off the disc in real time! ;) |
CD transports and resonance
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Ian Molton wrote: surely (massive) jitter from the *disc* end of things would manifest as read errors rather than jitter in the output stream? The usual academic response. "Depends what you mean by..." :-) Jitter when trying to read the channel bit steam off the disc might mean some bits were lost or repeated. However (in principle) the player might accomodate that, but in doing so end up jittering the 'correct' bit series it outputs so much as to annoy or confuse a following DAC/receiver. So "yes or no"... :-) Again though, the CD is read as fast as required to keep the read-buffer half full, which is, in turn drained at a constant rate. I cant see how jitter filling that buffer could manifest on the output unless it was great enough to drain the buffer or cause a read error that wasnt correctable, neither of which would really be 'normal operating conditions'... |
CD transports and resonance
In article ,
Paul Dormer wrote: A well worn disc is also likely to produce higher error rates (naturally). Wear suggests something which occurs normally with use - as happens with an LP. CDs don't appear to wear as such - my very first one ever still plays as new. Damage would be a better term. -- *No radio - Already stolen. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
CD transports and resonance
"Ian Molton" wrote in message
Again though, the CD is read as fast as required to keep the read-buffer half full, which is, in turn drained at a constant rate. I cant see how jitter filling that buffer could manifest on the output unless it was great enough to drain the buffer or cause a read error that wasnt correctable, neither of which would really be 'normal operating conditions'... You've got things right. The buffered read technique used by *every* optical disc transport is in essence, a massive anti-jitter box. The jitter of the digital data stream coming out of an optical disc transport is set by the output clock, not mechanical vibration in the transport. I've done experiements in which I measured the jitter coming out of a CD player suspended a few inches above a large woofer playing various frequencies at loud levels. The jitter showed no increase right up to the point where mistracking started. |
CD transports and resonance
"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 09:57:26 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) used to say... In article , Andy Evans wrote: But evidently you can't explain an obviously audible phenomenon. Trouble is, Andy, most of your posts concern 'audible phenomenon' that only you can hear... If only one person can hear it then by definition it's audible is it not? Since sighted evaluations are being used, it is unclear whether or not hearing is even involved. |
CD transports and resonance
In article ,
Paul Dormer wrote: Wear suggests something which occurs normally with use - as happens with an LP. CDs don't appear to wear as such - my very first one ever still plays as new. Damage would be a better term. Well I did say "well worn", by which I meant to infer scratched or grazed, but OK I accept your correction.. Does a properly setup turntable actually cause audible wear with each and every use?? I've never owned a high end turntable long enough to know. I'd say anything in mechanical contact must wear. My LPs certainly have. ;-) I do have a few elderly CD's which have gained pinholes in the metal layer just sitting on the shelf.. :-( I've heard of this but not experienced it. -- *Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
CD transports and resonance
In article ,
Kurt Hamster wrote: But evidently you can't explain an obviously audible phenomenon. Trouble is, Andy, most of your posts concern 'audible phenomenon' that only you can hear... If only one person can hear it then by definition it's audible is it not? To some, yes. Are the voices still troubling you? -- *How can I miss you if you won't go away? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
CD transports and resonance
In article ,
Paul Dormer wrote: A legendary Nimbus rot job.. Didn't Nimbus develop their own manufacturing facility - much to the amazement of the majors? Considering how difficult this must have been a few flaws aren't surprising. -- *Sorry, I don't date outside my species. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
CD transports and resonance
"Paul Dormer" wrote in message
For sake of argument, wouldn't it be quicker and more fun for Andy to just make whatever changes he feels improves his CD drive to his ears, and get on with his life rather than conducting a series of boring tests?? ;-) I mean.. permutations of stabilization technique could be very long winded. Eg, try some feet under it.. does it sound better? Yes/No... OK let's move on... Not scientific but less tedious... :-) A great opportunity for Andy to intellectually spin his wheels. Show him how, Paul its what you're good at. |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Paul Dormer
wrote: "Dave Plowman (News)" emitted : A well worn disc is also likely to produce higher error rates (naturally). Wear suggests something which occurs normally with use - as happens with an LP. CDs don't appear to wear as such - my very first one ever still plays as new. Damage would be a better term. Well I did say "well worn", by which I meant to infer scratched or grazed, but OK I accept your correction.. Does a properly setup turntable actually cause audible wear with each and every use?? I've never owned a high end turntable long enough to know. I do have a few elderly CD's which have gained pinholes in the metal layer just sitting on the shelf.. :-( Can't say for sure about 'audible' wear on LPs as - after any possible damage that occurs on the first playing (which will affect the first hearing, so isn't normally subject to be noticed as a change between playings) I'd expect any further damage to be slight per playing. (Exculding effects due to dust or a damaged stylus.) However I have seen photos taken using microscopes that show clear signs of stylus wear on the groove walls of LPs. IIRC there were also - many years ago - articles on this. Not seen results for current stylii/cartriges, though. Only ones for some years ago. FWIW I'm currently reading through various old articles on LP performance, but am concentrating on factors like noise level and distortion/mistracking rather than wear. I think, though, there are some papers on this in the JAES that I've skipped over in passing. The snag is that modern MC cartridges seem to often have lower compliances and higher masses than something like the 'old' V15 series. Hence they can be expected to wear the LP more than a V15 given a comparable stylus shape. Alas, I can't recall many modern reviews even noting this effect, let alone any systematic work on it. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Paul Dormer
wrote: "Jim Lesurf" emitted : . A CD-Rom vibrates quite a bit in your hand, Indeed. However when spinning at speeds above x1 it can re-read the disc to ensure consistent and reliable data recovery before sending out the resulting bitstream. In a realtime playback situation, isn't it tricky for a CD drive to accurately relocate itself to the correct position on a re-read, due to the very nature of audio CD's which are not timestamped?? The data is timestamped, but not on a per-sample basis. It is stamped in data blocks. Hence re-reads can be performed on a 'block' basis and once aligned, the relevant bits/bytes/samples compared and collated. What a specific CD reader does, though, is a matter for the maker of that particular drive... :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Paul Dormer
wrote: "Jim Lesurf" emitted : The assumption - and I think it's not unreasonable - is that stabilising a cd mechanism brings audible benefits. As a vague and unspecific generalisation that is fine. However it does not establish that this *is* the case in this specific instance. For that we require suitable tests to obtain relevant evidence. For sake of argument, wouldn't it be quicker and more fun for Andy to just make whatever changes he feels improves his CD drive to his ears, and get on with his life rather than conducting a series of boring tests?? ;-) Yes. However he *did* ask us for reasons/explanations for what he feels he hears. Once he does this we then need more info. However if he does not wish to determine any reasons... :-) I mean.. permutations of stabilization technique could be very long winded. Eg, try some feet under it.. does it sound better? Yes/No... OK let's move on... This is the snag with making obervations without reliable measurements. You end up having to try things 'at random' in the hope some might seem better, but not then be sure if or why... Not scientific but less tedious... :-) Far simpler IMHO to buy a Meridian and listen to the music. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
In article , Paul Dormer
wrote: "Dave Plowman (News)" emitted : I do have a few elderly CD's which have gained pinholes in the metal layer just sitting on the shelf.. :-( I've heard of this but not experienced it. Yep.. happened to a few of mine. This is out of a collection of several thousand though, so percentage-wise a small number. Have to say.. it's not necessarily obvious!! You can see the holes if you hold the disc up to the light, otherwise can easily be missed. I have one right here.. not a prime example, but I'll see if it picks up on the scanner. A legendary Nimbus rot job.. I have some CDs with pinholes. However so far as can tell, these have had them since purchase, and they have not altered. They seem playable with not audible problems I have noticed. The Philips Red Book spec caters for quite large holes in the info layer without this necessarily preventing recovery of the correct sample values. I've also had a number of the PDO Blackburn 'brown rot' discs, and they have replaced them all FOC when returned to them. However these don't show holes. Just a brown discolouration of the metal. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
CD transports and resonance
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
I do have a few elderly CD's which have gained pinholes in the metal layer just sitting on the shelf.. :-( I've heard of this but not experienced it. I've found pinholes in brand new CDs. some play, some dont. luck of the draw. |
CD transports and resonance
Paul Dormer wrote:
Audibly?? Have you performed the necessary scientific tests to confirm this degradation with each subsequent listen? ;-) Having seen vinyl swarf peeling off a record I can guarantee the wear is audible once it gets bad enough. |
CD transports and resonance
Paul Dormer wrote:
In a realtime playback situation, isn't it tricky for a CD drive to accurately relocate itself to the correct position on a re-read, due to the very nature of audio CD's which are not timestamped?? Not quite true. the problem is that the resolution of the timestamps is only one frame (IIRC 1/75th of a second). Define 'difficult'. My CD-ROM can read audio at over 30 speed. |
CD transports and resonance
Paul Dormer wrote:
"Ian Molton" emitted : Audibly?? Have you performed the necessary scientific tests to confirm this degradation with each subsequent listen? ;-) Having seen vinyl swarf peeling off a record I can guarantee the wear is audible once it gets bad enough. Yikes!! What kind of turntable was that on?? Did it have a nail for a stylus? ;-) "not mine" is all that I care about ;-) |
CD transports and resonance
Paul Dormer wrote:
"Ian Molton" emitted : I've found pinholes in brand new CDs. some play, some dont. luck of the draw. What.. some of them don't play *at all*? Well I tend to bin CDs once they fail to play properly. (Id do the same if it was vinyl too ;-) |
CD transports and resonance
Paul Dormer wrote:
"Ian Molton" emitted : In a realtime playback situation, isn't it tricky for a CD drive to accurately relocate itself to the correct position on a re-read, due to the very nature of audio CD's which are not timestamped?? Not quite true. the problem is that the resolution of the timestamps is only one frame (IIRC 1/75th of a second). Define 'difficult'. My CD-ROM can read audio at over 30 speed. I was thinking more of a dedicated CD player or transport. Is your drive capable of reliable DAE at that speed?? Pretty impressed if so! I think Im remembering it right. its certainly able to do a full CD in under 5 mins, which makes it 20 speed or better. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk