Notes on Dynagroove

To solve these old an obstinate problems in disc recording, highly ingenious computers -- "electronic brains" -- have been introduced to audio for the first time. These remarkable new electronic devices and processes grew out of an intense research program which produced notable advances in virtually every step in the recording science.

Source: Atkins, Chet. Back cover of Progressive Pickin'. RCA, 1964.

It sounded relaxed and informative in a manner I would not have expected from this measured performance

Julia Dudley, age 10, had this to say about the PlayStation 1^[1,2]:

You can play multiple games on it, like Mario, Zelda, and many more. You control the characters with a special remote control that you hook up to the PlayStation. There are multiple other PlayStations by Sony as well. There are even games for girls on it. This is how you play the game of your choice: First, you insert the game CD-R and hook up the memory chip to your PlayStation, then hopefully, the CD will not be defective, and you press Menu, and press what you played last (if you saved your last game). Lastly, voila, you can play your game leisurely until your mom calls you off to dinner (hopefully not spinach).

-----------
1 - Dudley, Art. "Sony PlayStation 1 CD Player." Stereophile, Vol. 31, No. 7 (July 2008): 73-81.

2 - Shoppers note: "This was a first generation machine, the only model to have the RCA output jacks and the AKM AK 4309AVM 16-bit sigma-delta DAC chip. My son Harry has a third generation PS1, and SCPH-7501, which has the multi-pin A/V output only and a different DAC chip; I measured that sample, but it was very much worse in most respects than the SCPH-1001."

Conundrum

About three months ago I bought a pair of Grado SR-60 headphones with the idea that I'd hook them up to my stereo when listening to music at night. My thinking was that my apartment walls are thin and my neighbor the med student usually has the lights off by 9pm and is out the door in the morning by 7am, and that I could therefore use sensitivity and politeness as excuses for buying some choice gear.

The only problem was that the Grados are so good that I couldn't bear to leave them lying there next to my stereo while I walked out the door listening to my iPod through those horrid ear buds. So before too long the SR-60s were more or less permanently attached to my iPod. Which, while great from a listening perspective, tended to undermine my sensitivity and politeness rationale. You see, the Grado's have an open design, meaning that when I'm rocking out everyone near me is treated to a tinny version of my music. Not a problem when walking down the street, but a rude way to ride the bus, let alone an airplane.

So now I'm in the market for reasonably good closed design headphones. Ideally, I'd like to spend only about $50, but I'd spend more for sound comparable to the Grados'. Also, I'd like to have them in my hands by Monday, so the brand has to be one I can find in the Detroit metro area.

For what it's worth, I happened to be at Target last night and gave the Bose TriPort's a listen. The sound seemed pretty good, though maybe so heavy and full that it verged on mushy. But the cost was more than I'd ideally like to spend, and they felt and looked extremely flimsy.

So, any suggestions?

Now I'm all alone with just my shadow in front

Item: The other day I came across the entry for 'wetback' in my 1986 edition of Webster's College Dictionary. Everything was pretty much as you'd expect until the end, where the dictionary noted that the term is, "sometimes considered offensive." Sometimes? Seriously?

Item: When I bought my hair clippers a decade or so ago they came with a one ounce tube of mineral oil for use as a lubricant. It only takes about one drop every third haircut, so I've only just now run out. Last night I went to my local Walgreen's to buy another one ounce tube but the smallest size they sold was 16 ounces, so I figure I'm set until about 2117. Except that, according to the label on my new bottle, mineral oil is actually a laxative. That's what I call dual use! Still, 16 ounces works out to 32 doses which, at my current rate of use should last at least through 2117. So.

Item: Apparently the Democratic presidential candidates had a debate yesterday before I even got out of bed. This shit has got to stop.

Item: My quest to understand the hostility toward Bose speakers among self-styled audiophiles continues apace. Part of the answer, I think, is that Bose has a better rep than most audiophile brands, but doesn't actually make better speakers. Fair enough, but to hear audiophiles talk you'd think that Bose made aggressively bad speakers, which they don't. Anyway, here's a clue lifted from Stereophile's 1975 review of the Bose 901. It's the manufacturer's comment on the review, and it isn't exactly friendly:

Our technical analysis of the theory behind the 901 differs from Stereophile's in a number of respects. Since the final test of a speaker is in its sound with actual program material, we urge Stereophile readers to audition the Bose 901 and then judge for themselves whether Stereophile or the 15 other US and foreign reviews, which draw completely different conclusions, is correct. |link|

When I saw colors, you saw pigs

Awhile ago I blogged about my iPod's disappointing quality as an audio source, even when using lossless compression. One of the things that perplexed me then was that I'd read an awful lot of praise for the quality of the Apple Lossless Codec in the audio press. Those folks are definitely more discerning than I am, so what gives?

I think the answer is that I've got a third generation iPod, and with the 4th generation Apple switched to a higher quality Digital Analog Converter. Is that right?

Relatedly, if I'm going to use the lossless codec on my iPod, I need more than the 20 gigs I've got now. So it looks like an upgrade is in the offing some time in the next year or so. Which brings me to this. Overkill?

Reader participation Wednesdsay, "how lossless is lossless?" edition

Items needed: A reasonably good stereo system capable of playing cds and accepting input from an iPod, an iPod, iTunes, a couple of cds.

Step One: Using iTunes, import a couple of tracks using the Apple Lossless Encoder. Be sure to pick tracks that you know pretty well and that exhibit a variety of sonic qualities.

Step Two: Put those tracks on your iPod (duh) and hook it up to your stereo (duh dum).

Step Three: Simultaneously play the encoded tracks and the source cd through your stereo, occasionally switching between sources and comparing the sound.

Step Four: Post your results in comments.

I tried this with Well, You Needn't off of Steamin' With the Miles Davis Qunitet, which is pretty much my go to track for testing stereo equipment. I found that while neither source had great flaws (no clipping or anything like that), the encoded track lost quite a lot of detail. This was especially noticable on Miles' solos, which were missing the breathiness that makes Miles' tone so remarkable. Also disappointing was the way that the encoded track rendered Paul Chambers' string bass solo. What was there was fine, but on the cd you can hear the sound of the notes reverberating within the bass, and that was entirely gone from the encoded track.

My understanding is that the Apple Lossless Encoder uses an algorithm that predicts, on the basis of what sound is being produced now, what sound will be produced not very long from now. I don't really see how that saves space, but whatever. Given my results, I'm left wondering if the algorithim just has a particularly difficult time with acoustic music because of the way that the notes trail off.

Sound, fury

When I bought a Judas Priest cd a few months back, a one time sound tech guy friend of mine took one look at it and told me that I had made a terrible mistake. You see, I'd bought the digitally remastered re-release and, he said, that particular remaster was notorious for the way that the sound had been fucked up. I'm pretty sure this sort of thing is what he was talking about.

So I guess I'm convinced. But what should I, music consumer that I am, do about it? Is there some kind of directory to tell me which remasterings to avoid, or should I just avoid them all? My casual acquaintance with the audiophile press suggests to me that while they do publish music reviews, they rarely publish reviews of music that I'm interested in listening to.

Who is right?

The party of the first part:

If you have any interest in building a high-quality audio system, the experts will tell you to spend what you can on speakers first, and spend on an amplifier second. This approach has been further reinforced by engineers who say there is no audible difference among amplifiers within a given price range. But you can’t hear your CD player or your speakers without an amplifier. |source|

Or, the party of the second part:

A principle that I want to be sure you understand is the hierarchy of Hi Fi. No component should ever be better than the component which precedes it (except maybe when evaluating equipment.) If the speakers outclass the rest of the system they will simply show you what a poor job the turntable or amplifier is doing. It is true that the speakers are often the weakest link of a cheap system and some improvement may be had by upgrading them but going beyond a point will make the sound worse. |source|

Dumb question

I'm thinking about buying a stereo to replace the one that was stolen^[1], and I'm confused. Here's the thing. I have less than no interest in a home theater system and the surround sound that such a system implies. I want a stereo. For music. Two channels of audio bliss combining to produce a homey 3D sound. But I also want a subwoofer. Perhaps stupidly, I believe that a good old fashioned two channel reciever won't let me hook up a subwoofer. Is it possible to connect a subwoofer to something with fewer than 6.1 channels and 87 buttons?

For the record, I care a whole lot more about clarity than volume. So maybe I'm also stupid to think that I even want a subwoofer.

------------
1 Which stereo was a hand me down from Jason, replacing the very nice stereo that I sold very cheaply in a haze of moving and sex which is actually the stereo that I am now, nine years later, replacing.