Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which is
supposed to and did play cdrw disc.

However over a time its stopped doing this and now has issues on some,
mainly home made but some commercial, discs as well. This manifests itself
as hunting either at the start or when you manually move a track u the
listing. It hunts for a couple of seconds then gives up with an error in the
display window. Unfortunately you need to eject the disc to get it to look
again.
I was just wondering whether this is just some drift in servos or a problem
with the laser.
This model was in fact from what I have seen, also sold as Philips as the
controls are in the same basic places and just the styling and case is
different, ie the Philips looks flimsy.

The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player. for around 40
quid. As such it works fine, and can even apparently do clever stuff with
ram sticks.
The one snag is that when playing cds, it always ducks the sound where a
track marker is, so say, a live cd with no breaks but track makers to help
you find parts of the recording tends to sound like a lot of small bits of
live performance.
It also has an annoying habit of chopping of the last few seconds of mp3
tracks both on cd and on ram sticks.
Looks to me like it needs some kind of firmware fix, but would not know if
this is true or its just a botched up cd player glued onto a dvd player.
This would not really matter if it were not for the fact that the actual
sound of it playing cds is amazingly good compared to many higher priced
players.
As I say, no head for part numbers but can get them when a pair of eyes
comes along later on.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

Brian,

Unless these are portable models, why not copy all your CDs/DVDs to a
PC with a large hard disk, and play them from there? All my original
disks are stored in boxes. I only ever play the file versions.

This has several advantages:
+ Convenience
+ You can play them on any device on the network
+ Security - the originals are safe from wear and tear,
and you can keep multiple backups on seperate units
around the home.
.... and in your particular case ....
+ You can use normal screen reading software,
rather than relying on special versions of hardware
for use of the blind, which might possibly be more expensive.

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:18:44 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which ...
[snip]
The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player ...
[snip]
--
================================================== ======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player
which is supposed to and did play cdrw disc.

However over a time its stopped doing this and now has issues on
some, mainly home made but some commercial, discs as well. This
manifests itself as hunting either at the start or when you manually
move a track u the listing. It hunts for a couple of seconds then
gives up with an error in the display window. Unfortunately you need
to eject the disc to get it to look again.
I was just wondering whether this is just some drift in servos or a
problem with the laser.
This model was in fact from what I have seen, also sold as Philips
as the controls are in the same basic places and just the styling
and case is different, ie the Philips looks flimsy.

The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player. for
around 40 quid. As such it works fine, and can even apparently do
clever stuff with ram sticks.
The one snag is that when playing cds, it always ducks the sound
where a track marker is, so say, a live cd with no breaks but track
makers to help you find parts of the recording tends to sound like a
lot of small bits of live performance.
It also has an annoying habit of chopping of the last few seconds of
mp3 tracks both on cd and on ram sticks.
Looks to me like it needs some kind of firmware fix, but would not
know if this is true or its just a botched up cd player glued onto a
dvd player. This would not really matter if it were not for the fact
that the actual sound of it playing cds is amazingly good compared
to many higher priced players.
As I say, no head for part numbers but can get them when a pair of
eyes comes along later on.


The problem with the Marantz is likely dust on the lens. You can buy a
cleaner disc which has a row of small bristles on the playing side. An
aerosol duster blown on the lens when it is exposed also works.


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 19/01/2016 21:00, Woody wrote:

The problem with the Marantz is likely dust on the lens. You can buy a
cleaner disc which has a row of small bristles on the playing side. An
aerosol duster blown on the lens when it is exposed also works.

The problem with the Marantz is not dust on the lens but rather
the fact that it's a Marantz. Best to visit your local charity shop
and get a Sony for twenty quid (or another reputable brand.)

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

--
Eiron.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

No eyes just yet.
Brian

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which is
supposed to and did play cdrw disc.

However over a time its stopped doing this and now has issues on some,
mainly home made but some commercial, discs as well. This manifests itself
as hunting either at the start or when you manually move a track u the
listing. It hunts for a couple of seconds then gives up with an error in
the display window. Unfortunately you need to eject the disc to get it to
look again.
I was just wondering whether this is just some drift in servos or a
problem with the laser.
This model was in fact from what I have seen, also sold as Philips as the
controls are in the same basic places and just the styling and case is
different, ie the Philips looks flimsy.

The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player. for around 40
quid. As such it works fine, and can even apparently do clever stuff with
ram sticks.
The one snag is that when playing cds, it always ducks the sound where a
track marker is, so say, a live cd with no breaks but track makers to help
you find parts of the recording tends to sound like a lot of small bits of
live performance.
It also has an annoying habit of chopping of the last few seconds of mp3
tracks both on cd and on ram sticks.
Looks to me like it needs some kind of firmware fix, but would not know if
this is true or its just a botched up cd player glued onto a dvd player.
This would not really matter if it were not for the fact that the actual
sound of it playing cds is amazingly good compared to many higher priced
players.
As I say, no head for part numbers but can get them when a pair of eyes
comes along later on.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

Yes I know I like to play cds though.I'm notinto putting all my eggs in one
big basket.
Brian

"Java Jive" wrote in message
...
Brian,

Unless these are portable models, why not copy all your CDs/DVDs to a
PC with a large hard disk, and play them from there? All my original
disks are stored in boxes. I only ever play the file versions.

This has several advantages:
+ Convenience
+ You can play them on any device on the network
+ Security - the originals are safe from wear and tear,
and you can keep multiple backups on seperate units
around the home.
... and in your particular case ....
+ You can use normal screen reading software,
rather than relying on special versions of hardware
for use of the blind, which might possibly be more expensive.

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:18:44 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which ...
[snip]
The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player ...
[snip]
--
================================================== ======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

Tried the dusting bit with no success, unless its really glued on somehow.
Worth a second try. I note in its instructions it sys do not use cleaning
discs as they might damage it.
Brian

"Woody" wrote in message
...

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which is
supposed to and did play cdrw disc.

However over a time its stopped doing this and now has issues on some,
mainly home made but some commercial, discs as well. This manifests
itself as hunting either at the start or when you manually move a track u
the listing. It hunts for a couple of seconds then gives up with an error
in the display window. Unfortunately you need to eject the disc to get it
to look again.
I was just wondering whether this is just some drift in servos or a
problem with the laser.
This model was in fact from what I have seen, also sold as Philips as the
controls are in the same basic places and just the styling and case is
different, ie the Philips looks flimsy.

The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player. for around
40 quid. As such it works fine, and can even apparently do clever stuff
with ram sticks.
The one snag is that when playing cds, it always ducks the sound where a
track marker is, so say, a live cd with no breaks but track makers to
help you find parts of the recording tends to sound like a lot of small
bits of live performance.
It also has an annoying habit of chopping of the last few seconds of mp3
tracks both on cd and on ram sticks.
Looks to me like it needs some kind of firmware fix, but would not know
if this is true or its just a botched up cd player glued onto a dvd
player. This would not really matter if it were not for the fact that the
actual sound of it playing cds is amazingly good compared to many higher
priced players.
As I say, no head for part numbers but can get them when a pair of eyes
comes along later on.


The problem with the Marantz is likely dust on the lens. You can buy a
cleaner disc which has a row of small bristles on the playing side. An
aerosol duster blown on the lens when it is exposed also works.


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

So not a fan of Marantz then, When it works the sound is far better than
many other machines I've tried, far less bright and seems to be giving a
better more natural dynamic range.
Brian

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
On 19/01/2016 21:00, Woody wrote:

The problem with the Marantz is likely dust on the lens. You can buy a
cleaner disc which has a row of small bristles on the playing side. An
aerosol duster blown on the lens when it is exposed also works.

The problem with the Marantz is not dust on the lens but rather
the fact that it's a Marantz. Best to visit your local charity shop
and get a Sony for twenty quid (or another reputable brand.)

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

--
Eiron.


--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 20/01/2016 10:05, Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Eiron wrote:

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD player
is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection which has been
boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid really. Controlled by
any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV needed at all.
Far, far better in every way.

How about Brian's requirement for no audible gap or dropout between tracks?
Important for classical or prog fans....

--
Eiron.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
So not a fan of Marantz then, When it works the sound is far better
than many other machines I've tried, far less bright and seems to be
giving a better more natural dynamic range.


I too have a Marantz CD5400SE and I couldn't agree more. I have
previously owned two Philips machines and they are essentially the
same and also sound very musical.


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
Tried the dusting bit with no success, unless its really glued on
somehow. Worth a second try. I note in its instructions it sys do not
use cleaning discs as they might damage it.

It might well have a coating of something on it. Things like nicotine or
other things that can float about in the air. From say the kitchen. So
other than dust.

And such things won't be shifted by an air duster.

--
*Time is what keeps everything from happening at once.

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD
player is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection which
has been boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid really.
Controlled by any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV needed at all.
Far, far better in every way.

I've wondered about doing something like this.

However, the snags as I see them:-

It's not going to be as fast to get up and running as a CD player - from
switch on. Or you leave it running permanently?

Have you ripped the CDs raw - or used MP3 etc? Big difference in the
storage needed.

Many computer based systems have less than perfect analogue outputs.

--
*Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday.

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:13:03 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD
player is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection which
has been boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid really.
Controlled by any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV needed at all.
Far, far better in every way.

Same here, though I have no intention of getting rid of the originals.
My entire media collection - including CDs, DVDs, downloads, and
things recorded off air - is now just about filling up a 3GB disk,
but not all of that is wanted all the time, so there is scope for
copying elsewhere or deleting quite a bit.

I've wondered about doing something like this.

However, the snags as I see them:-

It's not going to be as fast to get up and running as a CD player - from
switch on.


I think my laptop probably comes quicker than my DVD player, even from
a cold start.

Or you leave it running permanently?

Usually at least one of the NASs is permanently on.

Have you ripped the CDs raw - or used MP3 etc? Big difference in the
storage needed.

Mine are raw WAV files, but one could use flac or ape lossless
compression, the former seems to be more popular, and therefore is
likely to be better supported, than the latter, but note that some
versions of Microsoft Media Player won't support either without adding
extra codecs, or some such.

Many computer based systems have less than perfect analogue outputs.

I use a Terratec USB MkII soundcard rather than the one in the laptop,
but that's just because the HiFi is the other side of the kitchen, and
it's easier to find a long USB lead than a long stereo lead!

Or else you could use one of the better quality Network Media Players
that have digital audio outputs.
--
================================================== ======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:23:54 +0000, Java Jive
wrote:

Same here, though I have no intention of getting rid of the originals.
My entire media collection - including CDs, DVDs, downloads, and
things recorded off air - is now just about filling up a 3GB disk,
but not all of that is wanted all the time, so there is scope for
copying elsewhere or deleting quite a bit.

I hope you spotted the 'deliberate' mistake - 3TB!
--
================================================== ======
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:
In article , Eiron
wrote:

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD
player is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection which
has been boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid really.

I'm still using CD players to play CDs. Mainly because I have sufficient
CDs that it would take a hell of a long time to rip them all and scan all
the booklets. That said, the CD players I use most are an Audio CD recorder
and a Player + DAC combination.

I do have a few hundred CDs ripped, but only do a few more on occasion
(some today, asitappens!) Been doing them in batches for a few years now.
Alas I seem to still be getting them faster than I rip them!

Actually, in practice most of the files I add to NAS are either 96k/24
recordings from LPs/tapes or aac files from iplayer.

All flac.

The LPs take even longer to sort out! Clicks to remove from the worse
cases, and scanning 12" square covers is a real PITA. Requires a session
with GIMP to paste the scans together as I only have an A4 scanner.

But I'm doing them ready for the day that my Shure V15 stylii become
unusuable. Also handy for when I want to hear one whilst cooking dinner.
:-)

So in practice I find that making file copies of old LPs and tapes makes
more sense. You can then clean up defects and actually get better results
without the fuss-about of using a real record deck to hear the results.

Whereas putting a CD into a CD player isn't exactly a difficult task.

Controlled by any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV needed at all.
Far, far better in every way.

Afraid I find reading real ink-on-paper sleeve notes far easier than
looking at scans. In that area 'analogue rules' for me. 8-]

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 , Eiron
wrote:
On 20/01/2016 10:05, Bob Latham wrote:
In article , Eiron
wrote:

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD
player is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection
which has been boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid
really. Controlled by any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV
needed at all. Far, far better in every way.

How about Brian's requirement for no audible gap or dropout between
tracks? Important for classical or prog fans....

Shouldn't be a problem these days. The Linux and RO players I use do
'gapless' OK.

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 , Java Jive
wrote:

Mine are raw WAV files, but one could use flac or ape lossless
compression, the former seems to be more popular, and therefore is
likely to be better supported, than the latter, but note that some
versions of Microsoft Media Player won't support either without adding
extra codecs, or some such.

Since flac is open source it can continue to always be available. All else
failing, anyone who wants can re-use the source code to get at the flac
file contents. It also works fine, so I don't see it dissappearing any time
soon.

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:

I've been using home network streaming now for 3 or 4 years and would
not go back to CDs. I have all of my music anywhere in the house at
anytime with no discs cluttering up the place and needing storage space.
Biggest step forward in practical home music ever, IMHO.

I can play a CD and hear it via the same sound systems I can use to play
files from a NAS. So have the choice. I keep the CDs I've ripped:

A) Just in case I need them again because I've lost the rips and their
backups.

B) Copyright. It seems fair enough to me to use a ripped copy for
convenience *provided* I don't sell or give away the source CDs. Doing than
and keeping the rips would be piracy in my view.

Similarly, I keep the LPs I've made files from.

It does save some space as I can forgo things like the CD cases. But still
have to store the CDs and LPs somewhere safe from damage.

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:
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Whereas putting a CD into a CD player isn't exactly a difficult task.

But you can't flit around your entire record collection at will without
getting out of your comfy chair or even out of bed if you're ill. You
can't make a play list for future use or allow for someone playing a
different part of the same recording somewhere else in the house at the
same time.

I appreciate that you may not wish to do those things but CDs can't do
them streaming can.

I'm not sure I want to 'flit' round my entire collection anyway. Generally
decide what I want to listen to. Rather than have it as background music.
I've got the radio for that.

More fun looking for a particular CD and perhaps coming across a different
one. And same as LPs, the picture on the case can be very evocative.

--
*Can fat people go skinny-dipping?

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Whereas putting a CD into a CD player isn't exactly a difficult
task.

But you can't flit around your entire record collection at will
without
getting out of your comfy chair or even out of bed if you're ill.
You
can't make a play list for future use or allow for someone playing
a
different part of the same recording somewhere else in the house at
the
same time.

I appreciate that you may not wish to do those things but CDs can't
do
them streaming can.

I'm not sure I want to 'flit' round my entire collection anyway.
Generally
decide what I want to listen to. Rather than have it as background
music.
I've got the radio for that.

More fun looking for a particular CD and perhaps coming across a
different
one. And same as LPs, the picture on the case can be very evocative.



+1



--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:29:49 +0000, Bob Latham wrote:

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It's not going to be as fast to get up and running as a CD player -
from switch on. Or you leave it running permanently?

My Music is stored on a Synology NAS which goes to sleep when not in use
and spins down the drive(s). Startup is not instantaneous if the NAS was
asleep but plays music after about 20 seconds. The NAS is configured to
go to sleep if it is not accessed for more than 20 minutes.

Ouch! or Yikes! How often do you upgrade or swap out failing disk
drives, I wonder?


Have you ripped the CDs raw - or used MP3 etc? Big difference in the
storage needed.

Even back in the day when a 500GB drive was considered a monster size, I
never bothered deleting the original wav rips. I even created 160Kbps mp3s
in addition for 'ease of use' and 'portability'. In this day and age when
you can add half a dozen Terabytes to your desktop one drive at a time,
storing your audio CD rips as 44.1 Kilo samples per second 16 bit LPCM
wave files is no longer a strain on a typical desktop's or NAS box's
storage capacity unlike how things were when I first started digitising
my modest vinyl and not so modest reel to reel tape collection almost two
decades ago.


I have ripped all of my discs to flac. To be honest, I can't imagine why
anyone would decide to use anything else, it is the obvious sensible
choice. It enables all the important tag information and is lossless
and open standard and compressed, what more could you want.

Agreed! :-)


Many computer based systems have less than perfect analogue outputs.

Possibly.

My first player was a "Sonos Connect" which has analogue (fixed and
variable) and digital (spdif) outputs. I wasn't expecting much from the
analogue output and so from the start I used the digital output into my
AV amplifier.

If you rip your music to flac and then play it back using the digital
output from a Sonos Connect, the output has been proved independently to
be bit perfect and identical to the digital output from a CD player.

You can then play around with different dacs if you so wish or buy a
product that has a better dac inside it in the first place.

Thus rendering the issue of 'less than perfect playback' moot. What
slight imperfections there may be in lesser sound chips used on more
recent hardware over the past decade, are way below what we used to
accept for the priviledge of easy listening via a transistor radio or
portable ghetto-blaster or a Walkman cassette tape player.


I've been using home network streaming now for 3 or 4 years and would
not go back to CDs. I have all of my music anywhere in the house at
any time, with no discs cluttering up the place and needing storage
space.
Biggest step forward in practical home music ever, IMHO.


If you *maintain* an archival backup of your digitised/digital music
collection, you can address the unknown durability of factory pressed
music CDs without breaking into a sweat.

--
Johnny B Good

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:52:06 +0000, Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:

I've been using home network streaming now for 3 or 4 years and would
not go back to CDs. I have all of my music anywhere in the house at
anytime with no discs cluttering up the place and needing storage
space.
Biggest step forward in practical home music ever, IMHO.

I can play a CD and hear it via the same sound systems I can use to play
files from a NAS. So have the choice. I keep the CDs I've ripped:

A) Just in case I need them again because I've lost the rips and their
backups.

B) Copyright. It seems fair enough to me to use a ripped copy for
convenience *provided* I don't sell or give away the source CDs. Doing
than and keeping the rips would be piracy in my view.

Similarly, I keep the LPs I've made files from.

It does save some space as I can forgo things like the CD cases. But
still have to store the CDs and LPs somewhere safe from damage.

Very good point regarding the issue of copyright. I think 'chucking' the
original media and accompanying 'materials' is just a step too far when
transposing the content to alternative storage formats.

Presumably, you've taken the sensible step of keeping the CDs themselves
isolated from the potentially damaging printed 'inserts' to minimise the
risk of corrosion damage to the aluminium film reflective layer from
sulphurous compound residues in the bleached paper used for the printed
covers. I would think that, for best archival storage of optical media,
the use of a special positively pressurised container filled with dry
nitrogen gas would be called for.

Vinyl, I suspect might be better stored in a distilled water container
to minimise the physical distortion effects due to gravity. More
practically, the usual "Bookcase" form of storage where they're stood
upright on edge to achieve the same result seems to be an effective
solution, with no worries over whatever sulphurous compounds might happen
to lurk within their cover sleeves.

The point is, "Never ever burn your boats".

--
Johnny B Good

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Johnny B Good
wrote:
Vinyl, I suspect might be better stored in a distilled water container
to minimise the physical distortion effects due to gravity. More
practically, the usual "Bookcase" form of storage where they're stood
upright on edge to achieve the same result seems to be an effective
solution, with no worries over whatever sulphurous compounds might
happen to lurk within their cover sleeves.

I keep most LPs stored in one of the 'window seat' type cabinets. This is
just big enough to take hundreds of them with their spines upwards. Full
enough that they are held veritical and flat.

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:

I can play a CD and hear it via the same sound systems I can use to
play files from a NAS. So have the choice.

OK, but if you had ripped all of your CDs surely there would be no
reason or advantage in playing the CD, it would just be extra effort to
find the CD and put it away afterwards.

Swings and roundabouts. It also takes time to find something when stored as
a file on a NAS.

However the basic problems for me are as I said: That actually ripping CDs
and LPs takes a lot of time when you have many of them. The LPs get
priority because they also benefit from being de-clicked and can't be
played 'anywhere' as an LP. But take a lot of time because of the real-time
analogue-to-digital caputre, then de-clicking, and pest of scanning the
covers, etc. I do occasional batches of CDs, but the LPs take ages per disc
to get good results.

Some seconf-hand LPs (Jazz mainly) I bought are of particular interest, and
are a particular challenge. e,g, a Basie double LP. First had to be
recorded as 96k/24. Then declicked (hours of work over more than one day).
Then I scanned the gatefold cover and labels yesterday. (20 mins). Sometime
today I hope to carefully stitch together the A4 scans of parts of the 12 x
24 " gatefold sides. Again, takes ages.


On New Years day the BBC website carried a piece about Rachmaninov. In
the article it talked about several works that I knew well but one I
didn't, the Cello Sonata in G minor. I played the video on the BBC
website and decided I wanted it in my library.

I went to Presto classical, found a vesrion, listened to an excerpt,
purchased it and had it on my NAS in 20 minutes in CD quality flac.


I did for a while buy some high rez flac files from a certain well known
website. The purchases were backed up with a promise that, having bought,
they would always allow you to re-download the same files in future as
protection against you having lost your copy.

A few months later they had to stop offerring many labels. I guess the
rights had been bought up by someone else. From then on the ability to
re-fetch the already-purchased items evaporated.

So the moral is to ensure you keep your own backups. You can trust
commercial companies. And I include 'cloud' storage in that.


Absolutely wonderful, yet another way streaming makes playing CDs look
like gas light compared to electric. But the only proof of purchase I
have is an email, what happens if that goes missing? But then again,
having the CD doesn't prove you didn't steel it.

A few days ago I ordered copies of the Complete Brendel recordings on
Philips (114 DCs) and an Ellington Box (10 CDs) because they contain great
music and came out at about 1.50 per disc. Downloading them would have
eaten up my data bandwidth for the month, and probably cost more. And I'll
have the discs even if/when the retailer goes bust. 8-]

Interesting to see your "gas light" comment. IIRC Karajan said something
similar about analogue recordings and LPs... ;-

The bottom line is, each to what they prefer.

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:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Whereas putting a CD into a CD player isn't exactly a difficult task.

But you can't flit around your entire record collection at will without
getting out of your comfy chair or even out of bed if you're ill. You
can't make a play list for future use or allow for someone playing a
different part of the same recording somewhere else in the house at the
same time.

I appreciate that you may not wish to do those things but CDs can't do
them streaming can.

I'm not sure I want to 'flit' round my entire collection anyway.
Generally decide what I want to listen to. Rather than have it as
background music. I've got the radio for that.

That's fine, whatever floats your boat. I can't really see why you've
bothered to make the comment to be honest, seems like being negative for
the sake of it.

It's negative only in that you are recommending spending a deal of money
and time ripping every single CD (and perhaps LPs) to a computer based
system. If I wanted to listen to 'my' music via every computer here, I'd
have done it ages ago. But I don't.

More fun looking for a particular CD and perhaps coming across a
different one. And same as LPs, the picture on the case can be very
evocative.

What makes you think you can't browse the album covers in exactly the
same way with a streaming system but also have search / database
facilities to find music by Artist, Track title, Album title etc. ?

You've scanned in every single album cover too? And all the notes, etc?

With the possible exception of having the sleeve notes booklet in your
hand and an initial 20 seconds delay before music starts (whilst the
drive spins up), there is nothing I can think of where streaming isn't
better. You don't even need to put the discs away afterwards.

Some may like the 'event' of choosing and listening to music. And
everything that goes with it.

Someone in your household may decide they would like to have a 70s
evening and queue up all their 70s albums to play one after another or
Beethoven symphonies come to that. Then in either case there may be a
track you don't particularly like so you delete that from the queue, or
maybe change the track order - all easy with streaming without leaving
your seat.

If that were needed I'd simply drop them all onto the 360 which anyone can
use easily. ;-)

OK you may not wish to do any of those things but it isn't a negative
that you can.

The negative here is the amount of time needed to do it all. And cost too.

--
*Velcro - what a rip off!*

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes

I'm not sure I want to 'flit' round my entire collection anyway. Generally
decide what I want to listen to. Rather than have it as background music.
I've got the radio for that.

Interesting comment and yes, I like to listen to complete albums at
times, rather than random tracks. Having said that, I have copied
countless albums to a player (Brennan JB7) which allows me to play
random tracks, and random tracks often inspire me to then listen to the
complete album which I may not have played or thought about for many
years.
--
Graeme

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
If that were needed I'd simply drop them all onto the 360 which anyone
can use easily. ;-)

360?

360 Systems Short Cut. Basically a 'tape recorder' which uses an HD. But
allows software editing rather than a razor blade. Transport controls are
proper buttons you press. ;-)

--
*How can I miss you if you won't go away?

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 20/01/2016 13:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
The LPs take even longer to sort out! Clicks to remove from the worse
cases, and scanning 12" square covers is a real PITA. Requires a session
with GIMP to paste the scans together as I only have an A4 scanner.

I just take a digital photo and crop it appropriately, much easier than
scanning.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Graeme Wall
wrote:
On 20/01/2016 13:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
The LPs take even longer to sort out! Clicks to remove from the worse
cases, and scanning 12" square covers is a real PITA. Requires a
session with GIMP to paste the scans together as I only have an A4
scanner.

I just take a digital photo and crop it appropriately, much easier than
scanning.

Tried that a number of times with three different cameras over the years.
Always came out lacking detail, not correctly square linear geometry, and
worse lit. Took so much faffing about that using the scanner was quicker
and easier. These days I do 300 dpi scans and twiddle them together with
GIMP.

So in my case, yes, might be quicker to just take a photo... *if* I was
happy with what the results looked like. Which, alas, I didn't.

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 Thu, 21 Jan 2016 06:17:48 +0000, Bob Latham wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:

Ouch! or Yikes! How often do you upgrade or swap out failing disk
drives, I wonder?

I have 3 NAS boxes, one of them off site. The oldest is from 2010 and
none of them has ever given any indication of a problem with their hard
drive. Rightly or wrongly I use Western Digital REDS.

Rightly, imo, provided you've addressed the 8 second head unload timeout
issue (which the lack of failure of the oldest drive could imply except I
don't know whether this is simply because you're only spinning them for
just a few hours per day).

As long as you steer clear of the Seagate rubbish, you shouldn't suffer
too many problems especially if you check the SMART stats every other
week or so and don't *just* rely on smartmonctrl sending you an email
about imminent failure. :-)


If you *maintain* an archival backup of your digitised/digital music
collection, you can address the unknown durability of factory pressed
music CDs without breaking into a sweat.

Oh yes I have more than 1 complete backup.

I'm pretty certain the 30 odd GB's worth of audio material is triplicated
across disks. It's the multimedia (movie files and freeview recordings)
that aren't so protected but I'm prepared to accept such data losses
since they're not quite as important as all that compared to the audio
and other, less bulky vital records.

Even so, I care enough to minimise the risk of premature failure of the
drives by *not* subjecting them to spin down power saving. I regard the
extra 20 odd quid a year on the electricity bill this costs me as a form
of 'insurance'.

--
Johnny B Good

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 21/01/2016 18:44, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Graeme Wall
wrote:
On 20/01/2016 13:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
The LPs take even longer to sort out! Clicks to remove from the worse
cases, and scanning 12" square covers is a real PITA. Requires a
session with GIMP to paste the scans together as I only have an A4
scanner.

I just take a digital photo and crop it appropriately, much easier than
scanning.

Tried that a number of times with three different cameras over the years.
Always came out lacking detail, not correctly square linear geometry, and
worse lit. Took so much faffing about that using the scanner was quicker
and easier. These days I do 300 dpi scans and twiddle them together with
GIMP.

OK I'm using a decent tripod mounted DSLR with good lenses and soft
light, not flash, so it works for me.


So in my case, yes, might be quicker to just take a photo... *if* I was
happy with what the results looked like. Which, alas, I didn't.

Jim



--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
Tried that a number of times with three different cameras over the
years. Always came out lacking detail, not correctly square linear
geometry, and worse lit. Took so much faffing about that using the
scanner was quicker and easier. These days I do 300 dpi scans and
twiddle them together with GIMP.

OK I'm using a decent tripod mounted DSLR with good lenses and soft
light, not flash, so it works for me.

Even then, a tremendous fiddle. Paper etc is rarely flat. A scanner
usually sorts that, and gives a good square even image. Only thing is most
ain't big enough for an LP cover.

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

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

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 22/01/2016 11:24, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
Tried that a number of times with three different cameras over the
years. Always came out lacking detail, not correctly square linear
geometry, and worse lit. Took so much faffing about that using the
scanner was quicker and easier. These days I do 300 dpi scans and
twiddle them together with GIMP.

OK I'm using a decent tripod mounted DSLR with good lenses and soft
light, not flash, so it works for me.

Even then, a tremendous fiddle. Paper etc is rarely flat. A scanner
usually sorts that, and gives a good square even image. Only thing is most
ain't big enough for an LP cover.


Hence why I use the camera :-)

It can be fiddly to set up the first time but once you've established a
system that works it's a lot quicker than taking 4 separate scans of
each side and stitching them together afterwards.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 22/01/2016 11:41, Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Graeme Wall
wrote:
On 20/01/2016 13:43, Jim Lesurf wrote:
The LPs take even longer to sort out! Clicks to remove from the worse
cases, and scanning 12" square covers is a real PITA. Requires a
session with GIMP to paste the scans together as I only have an A4
scanner.

I just take a digital photo and crop it appropriately, much easier than
scanning.

Tried that a number of times with three different cameras over the
years. Always came out lacking detail, not correctly square linear
geometry, and worse lit. Took so much faffing about that using the
scanner was quicker and easier. These days I do 300 dpi scans and
twiddle them together with GIMP.

So in my case, yes, might be quicker to just take a photo... *if* I was
happy with what the results looked like. Which, alas, I didn't.

Probably a stupid question but before you've gone to this much trouble you
have checked Google images haven't you?


Not quite so useful for LP covers, especially for some of the more
obscure ones. Also doesn't give you the reverse which some people want
for the descriptions.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

In article , Graeme Wall
wrote:
Probably a stupid question but before you've gone to this much trouble
you have checked Google images haven't you?


Not quite so useful for LP covers, especially for some of the more
obscure ones. Also doesn't give you the reverse which some people want
for the descriptions.

Indeed. FWIW I also scan the labels and any inserts/booklets.

It is tedious to do. But we were enjoying earlier today the 96k/24 files
I'd made from "The Kid from Redbank V2" gatefold double LP set. Only 5 quid
from a 2nd hand shop. Hundreds of clicks to mend, and fiddly to scan and
stitch. But now sounds 'better than new'.

I have a similar pile of 2nd hand LPs I've never yet heard. So for obvious
reasons tend to do these rather than rip CDs, despite the process being far
more tedious.

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 Fri, 22 Jan 2016 07:10:58 +0000, Bob Latham wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:

Even so, I care enough to minimise the risk of premature failure of
the
drives by *not* subjecting them to spin down power saving. I regard the
extra 20 odd quid a year on the electricity bill this costs me as a
form of 'insurance'.

Interesting. Is there real evidence to support this? If keeping them
running costs £20/year (I've not done the maths) AND it made a drive
failure significantly less likely then it would be as you say
"insurance"
and I would do it myself. I'm just not certain of the facts. The drive
will still fail at some point and you'll have paid that years insurance.

With a no spin down usage presumably you should be using a different
colour of Western Digital drive?

The short answer is "No." Regardless of Seagate's misleading claims in
regard of certain of their models not being "rated for 24/7 operation",
spinning the platters 24/7 is actually the kindest and least stressful
mode of operation for *any* hard disk drive (with the possible exception
of those Seagate 'specials'). Any disk manufacturer who tries to claim
otherwise should be regarded as either a lunatic or a shyster not
deserving of your business.

Even three decades back, when they were still using ball race bearings
on the platter spindles, the HDD manufacturers were claiming MTBF figures
of up to half a million hours (not to be confused with the more realistic
MTTF figures now in common use). If nothing else, this reveals an
expectation that the parts you might expect to suffer from age related
physical damage such as spindle bearings were surprisingly robust (you
could hardly claim a half million hours MTBF if the bearings were unable
to last at least that long - there are plenty of other factors involved
in hard drive failure).

About 15 years ago, Samsung pioneered the "Fluid Dynamic Bearing" (FDB),
essentially a modified form of 'plain bearing' using the proven
robustness of shell bearings used in internal combustion engines (and its
steam powered predecessors) for over a century. This was an even more
long lasting solution allowing MTBF figures up to 1 million hours to be
quoted (no products of combustion to contaminate the lubricant used by
these bearings which allowed a one time 'fill', good for the half million
or longer MTBF rated lifetime).

It's clear from this that constant spinning of the platters is not the
issue in regard of an HDD's life. What surprisingly does matter, is the
durability of the electronics, even when short lived electrolytic
capacitors are excluded from the equation, in particular the controller
chips and the solder joints on the multilayer PCBs which can suffer
'fatigue' induced by the effects of thermal cycling.

If you examine the more detailed spec sheets of a modern HDD, you'll
also observe maximum life rating figures for power cycling events and
head unload/parking cycles before they anticipate problems due to 'wear'.
This confirms what most of us intuitively realised as factors in
premature disk failure, particularly the former one in regard of the spin
up stresses imposed every time you power a drive up and wait for it to
accelerate to operational speed.

This latter problem, spin up stress, was a genuine concern with the pre
IDE drive models where the operational current at rated spindle speed,
typically 3600rpm, would be 1 amp off the 12 volt rail but the spin up
current demand could be as high as 5 amps on power up (those drives got
up to speed in only 3 to 4 seconds - none of this waiting 20 seconds
nonsense, which tames this acceleration surge current, that you now see
with modern drives).

The most important factor regarding durability of a modern drive (all
makes and models of HDD) is thermal cycling followed by operating
temperatures running uncomfortably close to the maximum limit (60 deg C
for quite a long time now but, more recently, up to 65 deg C).

The google data centre HDD reliabilty figures published a few years
back, showed only a very small correlation between durability and
temperature other than at the extreme limits. However, it's important to
remember that all these HDDs were in RAID configurations in air
conditioned data centres spinning 24/7 (no spin down / spin up power
saving stresses for them!).

I'm viewing the SMART figures on the oldest drive in my NAS4Free box
right now (it's an Hitachi Deskstar 5K3000 Cool Spin model I installed
almost 4 years and 3 months ago - I know this from the PoH figure of the
37042 hours it has currently clocked up).

It happens to be the only drive right now that has managed to accumulate
4 UNC errors. The first two errors at the 7481 hour mark (311 days and 17
hours) and the last two at the 10815 hour mark (450 days and 15 hours).
No further errors have occurred in the subsequent 26227 hours to date.
But for those UNC errors, the drive's SMART log shows an unblemished
record and its operational behaviour in service has remained exemplary to
this day.

The second oldest drive (I don't use RAID, just JBOD) is a 4TB Hitachi
Deskstar (HDS724040ALE640) which I installed as a replacement, just over
2 years and 3 months ago (PoH = 20050), for the original Hitachi I'd had
to RMA after just 11 months of service before the smartmonctrl daemon
emailed me a critical smart failure report which I didn't notice until a
week or so later (I'm very lax over checking emails). Luckily, a 56 hour
session with ddrescue and its immdediate replacement, an identically
sized Western Digital RED, saved every last byte of data. It would seem
that the SMART technology (at least in Hitachi's case) is maturing into a
more useful feature. :-)

Incidently, the 4TB WD RED which was fitted a week before I received the
Hitachi replacement (which I'd used to replace a failing 5 year old 2TB
Samsung Spinpoint with a staggering ONE MILLION PLUS head unload cycles -
the consequences of an APM experiment gone wrong - it's not just WD
drives that can clock insane head unloading cycles in very short order),
happens to be suffering what I can only best describe as "Dorian Grey
Syndrome" ("It looks younger than it really is" when you check out its PoH
figure).

By rights, it should be showing a PoH figure close to 20300 hours. In
fact it's now showing a PoH figure of just 11952. Not a major problem.
Indeed, when it comes to the possibility of selling it on, it's a bit of
a bonus in regard to its 2nd hand resale value. :-)

When I was enquiring in the u.h.c news group about two years ago as to
whether anyone else had observed this intriguing 'fault', what few
replies I got suggested either a cosmic ray effect or a soft memory error
in the counter.

At that point, I think I'd only seen one or two such "Drop Back by a
thousand hours" events and a "sample of one" is no basis to form any
opinion. However, that all changed just a few short months ago when I
replaced the last remaining 2TB SpinPoint drive with a brand spanking new
6TB WD Green drive. This too, rather surprisingly, also enjoys exactly
the same "Dorian Grey Syndrome" which answers the question of whether the
originally observed effect was a random error or a systemic fault.

Obviously, its a systemic effect, common to WD branded drives. If you're
in the habit of upgrading your drives every two or three years, WD models
would seem to be an even better choice when it comes to 2nd hand resale
value.

This youngest of the four drives in the NAS currently shows a mere 225
hours of PoH time after at least 2582 hours worth of run time since the
NAS was last rebooted some 107 days and 14 hours ago. However, using the
weekly short smart test logging data, I've been able to estimate a more
accurate 2650 figure (16 test events, including the initial "Conveyance
offline" test in a log limited to 21 entries maximum) which equates to my
upgrading the NAS box's capacity just over 3 1/2 months ago.

The SMART log data is currently indicating that all 4 drives remain in
good working condition with even the youngest drive having safely
survived the "Infant Mortality" phase of its life cycle. I think I can
now consider re-purposing the drive it displaced from the box. I try to
avoid re-purposing the retired drives straight away just in case the new
drive succumbs to "Infant Mortality". "Better safe than sorry" is my
approach to such upgrades.

BTW, anyone using a 6TB drive in a FreeNAS or NAS4Free box for the first
time using UFS can rest assured that there isn't a 4TiB wrap around bug
lurking in the driver code to catch you out. I copied the contents of the
3TB drive into a 'backup folder' on the new drive (which had replaced the
2TB Samsung unit) specifically to test for this (Once bitten, twice shy).

I'd been caught out by the 1TiB wrap around bug in the Ext2 driver code
some years ago, back in the day when I had upgraded the 1TB SpinPoints to
2TB SpinPoints and was still using the Ext2 FS option for compatibility
with the Ext4win driver which allowed my win2k box to read and write to
Ext2 and Ext3 disk volumes.

I posted a bug report and hung on for several months, awaiting a fix. I
was using a Knoppix Live CD (from an 8GB usb stick) to keep the NAS box
going before I got fed up with Linux's **** poor CIFs/SMB performance and
reformatted the couple of 2TB spinpoints affected by this issue using the
much faster performing UFS FS native to BSD.

I'm guessing I'll have to wait for 10TB drives to become available
before I need to worry about testing for an 8TiB wrap around bug in the
UFS driver code. Since developments in larger drive capacities are
finally outpacing my demands for ever more storage space, I don't expect
to be faced with this problem for quite a few years yet.:-)

--
Johnny B Good

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 22/01/2016 07:10, Bob Latham wrote:
With a no spin down usage presumably you should be using a different
colour of Western Digital drive?

One of the tricks with a small raid setup is to use multiple different
makes. Then if you get a lemon you've only lost the parity, not the data.

Andy

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

I've cleaned the lens in the Marantz, and though its slightly better its
still rather hit and miss. It seems to me that the time it looks for
something to read is far too short, either that or there is too much play
in one of the mechanisms causing servo hunt to be excessive and it gives
up.
Brian

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
Tried the dusting bit with no success, unless its really glued on
somehow. Worth a second try. I note in its instructions it sys do not
use cleaning discs as they might damage it.

It might well have a coating of something on it. Things like nicotine or
other things that can float about in the air. From say the kitchen. So
other than dust.

And such things won't be shifted by an air duster.

--
*Time is what keeps everything from happening at once.

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

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

On 20/01/2016 11:14, Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Eiron wrote:
On 20/01/2016 10:05, Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Eiron wrote:

There is still a place for a dedicated CD player. It will play within
a couple of seconds of switching it on and you don't need a TV to see
what it's doing.

I'm sorry personally I don't agree. I think that in the home the CD
player is now obsolete. A small NAS holds my entire CD collection
which has been boxed up in the loft for years now, should get rid
really. Controlled by any modern mobile phone or tablet and no TV
needed at all. Far, far better in every way.


I store most of my digital music on a NAS - works very well for me. I
never found CDs gave that tactile 'emotional' attachment to the music
that, say, LPs give.

Setting it up was a mild nuisance (ripping to flac), but now it's done,
adding new material is easy. About 2000 albums, 500GB.

And my software of choice - Synology's own music player - gives a number
of nice extras, including metadata (lyrics etc) as well as the usual
album covers, playlist creation, song rating, and the ability to find
tracks using some quite loose search terms in seconds.

How about Brian's requirement for no audible gap or dropout between
tracks? Important for classical or prog fans....


While I'm very happy with Synology's hardware/software, that's one thing
I've not been able to fathom. I have to use other software (such as that
supplied with the Cambridge NP30 music server) to play gapless material.

I have four players in my house and none of them produces any "audible
gap" that isn't on the CD. I believe this is described as gapless playback.


Which software/music server are you using?

I have to say I have no idea how suitable this would be for someone who is
blind as control is via phone or tablet but I am convinced CD players have
had their day for most of us.


Not sure either for those with impaired vision. I'd have thought the
RNIB would have a take on it?

As for the end of the CD player? I'd guess it's on the way out. Spotify
seems to be the choice of quite a few of my music enthusiast friends.

For myself, I use it maybe 5 or 6 times a year.


--
Cheers, Rob

Couple of cd queries, model numbers later
 

More than happy to help with the part numbers, and indeed a lens cleaner
- if you're local! Sheffield . . .

On 19/01/2016 09:18, Brian Gaff wrote:
OK I have a not that old but out of warranty Marantz cd player which is
supposed to and did play cdrw disc.

However over a time its stopped doing this and now has issues on some,
mainly home made but some commercial, discs as well. This manifests
itself as hunting either at the start or when you manually move a track
u the listing. It hunts for a couple of seconds then gives up with an
error in the display window. Unfortunately you need to eject the disc to
get it to look again.
I was just wondering whether this is just some drift in servos or a
problem with the laser.
This model was in fact from what I have seen, also sold as Philips as
the controls are in the same basic places and just the styling and case
is different, ie the Philips looks flimsy.

The other one is a brand new panasonic el cheapo dvd player. for around
40 quid. As such it works fine, and can even apparently do clever stuff
with ram sticks.
The one snag is that when playing cds, it always ducks the sound where a
track marker is, so say, a live cd with no breaks but track makers to
help you find parts of the recording tends to sound like a lot of small
bits of live performance.
It also has an annoying habit of chopping of the last few seconds of mp3
tracks both on cd and on ram sticks.
Looks to me like it needs some kind of firmware fix, but would not know
if this is true or its just a botched up cd player glued onto a dvd
player. This would not really matter if it were not for the fact that
the actual sound of it playing cds is amazingly good compared to many
higher priced players.
As I say, no head for part numbers but can get them when a pair of eyes
comes along later on.
Brian



--
Cheers, Rob