Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 25/01/2016 12:12, Brian Gaff wrote:

I also remember the discs with holes drilled in them which you could not
hear, Strangely I never did find any player which could manage this feat.

I've tried it with a 2mm drill bit. It works.

--
Eiron.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


** Sony would hardly build an audible fault into their very first CD
players and they did not.

The channel to channel time offset involved was 11.3 microseconds or
less than 4mm of travel through the air from loudspeaker to listener.


Could be a problem if the outputs are subsequently monoed, though?


** Only if the CD was recorded in mono - and then it is redundant.



..... Phil

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Phil
Allison wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


** Sony would hardly build an audible fault into their very first CD
players and they did not.

The channel to channel time offset involved was 11.3 microseconds or
less than 4mm of travel through the air from loudspeaker to
listener.


Could be a problem if the outputs are subsequently monoed, though?


** Only if the CD was recorded in mono - and then it is redundant.

It was an issue some UK broadcast engineers noticed IIRC. They were aware
of it because a lot of radio and TV listening was in mono.

When playing CDs with a domestic stereo it didn't matter very much for the
reason you gave. Even when playing a CD of an old mono recording, the
effect was small. But it would cause treble roll-off for mono radio
reception.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:

FWIW I just treat the NAS as part of the filing system on my machines
and run files to play them just as I would if they were on a given
machine's HDs. No need for any UPnP, etc.


I personally didn't want a computer as the core source of my music
system. I wanted the convenience of full control from a phone or iPad
and no moving parts or laptops in the listening room.

In our HiFi Room the CD player is also the DAC. And I use a small computer
for playing files/iplayer

The living room is more reliant on a computer as I also use get_iplayer to
fetch the bulk of the TV we may watch, then play it later. For this reason
I'm also converting my old DVD video home recordings to mkv files to play.


I'm also not a fan of push system especially USB, ie. where a PC pushes
audio into a USB DAC.

Strictly speaking, the decent USB DACs 'pull' because they control the data
transfers to suit their clocking.

In my mind, pull systems, where the player pulls music from the NAS are
a more elegant and a better way to do it and it doesn't involve USB
which seems to be a can of worms. This is purely my personal opinion I
wouldn't claim it to be fact.

If a USB DAC is Audio Class 1/2 compliant it should just work with a
suitable computer. Alas, MicroSoft do tend to foul this up because of their
persistent lazy failure to support Class 2 by default, lumbering users with
a need for a 'driver'. Duh.

The main problem with Linux is beating Pulse Audio to death with a stick
and not having it rise from the grave when you put down the stick. 8-]

The big advantage of using ethernet-based 'just a filing system' methods is
that you can dodge such nonsense. But may then not know if the actual
playout device *is* playing without tampering with the samples. Depends, as
ever, on the device and its design.

Doing tests a few days ago I found that the monitor (actually a small TV)
my wife uses with her compuyer accepts 44.1k/16bit over HDMI, but then
outputs 48k from its optical spdif output. Sadly typical idiocy which most
users won't think of checking, or be able to measure. Means that a needless
conversion is being performed.

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:




** Sony would hardly build an audible fault into their very first CD
players and they did not.

The channel to channel time offset involved was 11.3 microseconds or
less than 4mm of travel through the air from loudspeaker to
listener.


Could be a problem if the outputs are subsequently monoed, though?


** Only if the CD was recorded in mono - and then it is redundant.


It was an issue some UK broadcast engineers noticed IIRC. They were aware
of it because a lot of radio and TV listening was in mono.


** That is simply non credible.


When playing CDs with a domestic stereo it didn't matter very much for the
reason you gave.

** It fact it does NOT matter - AT ALL !!!


Even when playing a CD of an old mono recording, the effect was small.

** There is NO effect when using a stereo system - AT ALL !!!

Good grief this is silly.


But it would cause treble roll-off for mono radio
reception.

** But only with a mono CD in use.

What does "mono radio" mean ?

Some poxy AM / FM portable ?

You gotta be joking.



.... Phil

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Phil
Allison wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


** Sony would hardly build an audible fault into their very first
CD players and they did not.

The channel to channel time offset involved was 11.3 microseconds
or less than 4mm of travel through the air from loudspeaker to
listener.


Could be a problem if the outputs are subsequently monoed, though?


** Only if the CD was recorded in mono - and then it is redundant.

It was an issue some UK broadcast engineers noticed IIRC. They were
aware of it because a lot of radio and TV listening was in mono.

Broadcasters were using this player?

When playing CDs with a domestic stereo it didn't matter very much for
the reason you gave. Even when playing a CD of an old mono recording,
the effect was small. But it would cause treble roll-off for mono radio
reception.

Plenty of so called stereo pop records have quite a degree of mono content.
A good test for the linearity of any system is to add (or subtract) the
two identical mono signals. Any timing etc errors will show up.

Of course if you only ever listen in stereo, possibly no problem.

At one time, stereo/mono compatibility was very real, with the majority
listening in mono to most things made in stereo.

--
*The first rule of holes: If you are in one, stop digging!

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

It was an issue some UK broadcast engineers noticed IIRC. They were
aware of it because a lot of radio and TV listening was in mono.

Broadcasters were using this player?

Swap cart for horse. :-) My recollection is seeing reports that some had
considered it, but rejected it because mono listeners would get rolled away
HF when mono CDs were played into the programme.

So the correct description is that the *avoided* using it when the realised
what would happen.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Phil
Allison wrote:

It was an issue some UK broadcast engineers noticed IIRC. They were
aware of it because a lot of radio and TV listening was in mono.


** That is simply non credible.


But the reality in the UK at the time. The point was that broadcasters knew
that:

1) Many listeners to FM radio in the UK were were listening in mono,

2) Many older recordings were mono, even when re-released on Audio CD.

Given the availability of CD players that didn't time-offset the channels
it was easy to avoid the risk of problems by choosing a suitable
alternative.

If you want to argue, you'd need a Tardis to go back and argue with the
broadcasters of the time. I just recall reading about it at the time.

Afraid that in those days broadcasters - particularly at the BBC were
expected to obsess about the OGP. i.e. the Old Granny Problem of the
listeners who use older kit, or the older recordings to be played out.

But it would cause treble roll-off for mono radio reception.

** But only with a mono CD in use.

See (2) above.

What does "mono radio" mean ?

See (1) above.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 26/01/2016 13:54, Jim Lesurf wrote:
Afraid that in those days broadcasters - particularly at the BBC were
expected to obsess about the OGP. i.e. the Old Granny Problem of the
listeners who use older kit, or the older recordings to be played out.

A problem that has plagued those of us on the picture side right up to
the digital switch-over!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 26/01/2016 13:54, Jim Lesurf wrote:
Afraid that in those days broadcasters - particularly at the BBC were
expected to obsess about the OGP. i.e. the Old Granny Problem of the
listeners who use older kit, or the older recordings to be played out.

A problem that has plagued those of us on the picture side right up to
the digital switch-over!

I take it you're referring to aspect ratio?

Not sure I like the modern solution - simply ignore it. So end up with
archive material being broadcast in the wrong aspect ratio, when an insert
to a prog. Would never do to have some of that 60" screen with borders to
the sides. ;-)

And ARCing it is often no better.

--
*I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.