CD is rubbish

[John Duncan]

Discussed here

Interesting reading - suggesting that the manufacture of a CD can turn modest spinners into better ones. Thoughts?

 

[Thaiman]

I am not gonna knock it until I try it (although few years back I though that no way the like of SACD and DVD-A gonna took over CD format).
15 Carpenters CDs for £250? may just do that

 

[a91gti]

Makes sense I guess given the difference in quality from a bad vinyl pressing to a good one.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Thaiman:15 Carpenters CDs for £250? may just do that

+£35 for express shipping, plus probably about £50 for VAT and the collection charge

 

[Thaiman]

Mr. E, Do you think these CD will hit UK market soon? I think HD music is gonna be the most popular source and over take CD player within 2 -3 years so the business look rather risky.

 

[Andrew Everard]

I think like most of these 'formats' they will be Japan-only releases, available as expensive imports for collectors elsewhere.

Currently doing some listening/viewing to a superb Japan-market classical release on Blu-ray Disc, but that one's the better part of £50 shipped from Japan. More on that in a blog sometime soon...

 

[chebby]

It sort of parallels the way in which JVC's (and others) SQ/CD4 quadraphonic experiments in the early 1970s improved stylus technology and plastics/pressing standards.

In order to preserve the ultra-sonic 'carrier' frequency pressed into the groove, stylus profiles like 'Shibata' were used and vinyl + pressing had to be of a higher order of quality so that the ultrasonic frequency did not get worn away after a few plays.

Because so many major companies were involved (Arista, Atlantic, Elektra, JVC, RCA, Reprise, Warner for CD4 and Capitol, CBS, Columbia, EMI, Epic, Harvest, HMV with SQ) the 'trickle down' of improvements benefitted stereo users also. (Well, those with good enough equipment to tell.)

Let's hope enough big industry 'players' think it is worthwhile to adopt this new CD manufacturing technology. I doubt it though. The world of early 1970s hifi was a humungous marketplace in comparison to today and (apart from cassette and FM) vinyl dominated.

CD is becoming more of a niche in a market that is becoming smaller and more fragmented by the day and where downloads increasingly dominate.

Demographics play a part in this too. There is no longer the interest from countless millions of affluent post-war 'baby boomers' in this sort of technology. (Even they have iPods now).

To get to number 1 in the album charts of the 1960s & 1970s you had to sell millions. On a quiet week today you can get to number 1 with a few tens of thousands of sales (unless a big name happens to die the same week!)

I just don't think the economies of scale are there to support it in a widespread way.

 

[idc]

Oh how times have changed, it was either the Kaiser Chiefs or Elbow whose last release got to number one in the record charts by selling under 100 copies in the first week!

I asked this on the blog, but no harm in asking again, Andrew, will you have a try at importing one of the CDs onto itunes and make a comparison? Please.

 

[pwiles1968]

Easy reading
So if you can make a disc easier to read, the error correction has less work to do, and the result should be a better sound, right?

Really interesting article but it has got me thinking, If this is the case that the cd materials and manufacturing make a difference and I will admit I am open minded about these things, then how much credence is there in the CD tweaking side of things that are also supposed to improve the reading of the disc, green pens, freezing the CD's etc, I realise I may be hunted down and branded a which for even mentioning such things but what experience has anyone had with CD modding, I would love to sit down on a blind test of these 'tweaks' just to see for myself maybe a Big Question article?

 

[Andrew Everard]

idc:I asked this on the blog, but no harm in asking again, Andrew, will you have a try at importing one of the CDs onto itunes and make a comparison? Please.

Already tried that, idc, and there's no obvious difference in the sound between standard and 'new-spec' CDs.

Of course, because the rip is able to use more error-correction, and isn't happening in real-time (as the data-extraction is when simply playing a disc), that's exactly as you would expect it to be.

 

[Andrew Everard]

pwiles1968:how much credence is there in the CD tweaking side of things that are also supposed to improve the reading of the disc, green pens, freezing the CD's etc

Can't speak for the effects of freezing, but the idea of the green pens was to reduce light scatter within the transparent layer of the disc, while other companies made green 'tyres' which fitted round the rim and had the extra claimed effect of increasing the mass a little, adding to the flywheel effect and thus stopping the discs from wobbling as much in the player.

Similar thinking was behind the TEAC VRDS system, with its disc-sized clamp, Pioneer's Stable Platter Mechanism - disc upside down on a turntable, read by the laser from above - and any number of aftermarket disc stabilisers.

 

[John Duncan]

Andrew Everard:
idc:I asked this on the blog, but no harm in asking again, Andrew, will you have a try at importing one of the CDs onto itunes and make a comparison? Please.

Already tried that, idc, and there's no obvious difference in the sound between standard and 'new-spec' CDs.

Of course, because the rip is able to use more error-correction, and isn't happening in real-time (as the data-extraction is when simply playing a disc), that's exactly as you would expect it to be.

So bit-perfect data ripped to hard discs is better than CDs?

 

[The_Lhc]

pwiles1968: I realise I may be hunted down and branded a which

A what?

 

[chebby]

JohnDuncan:So bit-perfect data ripped to hard discs is better than CDs?

Now don't start that one going again.

Get a naimuniti then you can compare directly between CD and streamed lossless via the same DAC (and even have the output levels matched I think.)

Hopefully Joel did not read this.('Naim'. 'lossless', 'streamed', and 'DAC' all in the same sentence!)

[Edit] Just checked the online manual. And there is a function called 'input trim' (section 4.3 page E9) which.. "Enables the relative level of each input to be adjusted so that each is of an approximately equal volume."

Ideal 'vehicle' for those CD vs Lossless blind tests

 

[pwiles1968]

the_lhc:
pwiles1968: I realise I may be hunted down and branded a which

A what?

Should have installed the Psychic spell checker.

 

[pwiles1968]

Andrew Everard:

pwiles1968:how much credence is there in the CD tweaking side of things that are also supposed to improve the reading of the disc, green pens, freezing the CD's etc

Can't speak for the effects of freezing, but the idea of the green pens was to reduce light scatter within the transparent layer of the disc, while other companies made green 'tyres' which fitted round the rim and had the extra claimed effect of increasing the mass a little, adding to the flywheel effect and thus stopping the discs from wobbling as much in the player.

Similar thinking was behind the TEAC VRDS system, with its disc-sized clamp, Pioneer's Stable Platter Mechanism - disc upside down on a turntable, read by the laser from above - and any number of aftermarket disc stabilisers.

Did any of them work.

 

[John Duncan]

chebby:
JohnDuncan:So bit-perfect data ripped to hard discs is better than CDs?

Now don't start that one going again.

Get a naimuniti then you can compare directly between CD and streamed lossless via the same DAC (and even have the output levels matched I think.)

Hopefully Joel did not read this.('Naim'. 'lossless', 'streamed', and 'DAC' all in the same sentence!)

[Edit] Just checked the online manual. And there is a function called 'input trim' (section 4.3 page E9) which.. "Enables the relative level of each input to be adjusted so that each is of an approximately equal volume."

Ideal 'vehicle' for those CD vs Lossless blind tests

Yeah, I only heard the streaming so can't comment on the CD section, though other people did...

 

[Anonymous]

pwiles1968:
Easy reading
So if you can make a disc easier to read, the error correction has less work to do, and the result should be a better sound, right?




Early CD player laser mechanisms and electronics had some really useful access points to their processing.

In the 80's I modified a Philips CD104 to output the amount of times error correction was being applied to the data stream. It also showed the quality of the signal being retrieved from the disc, along with amplitude, focus and tracking errors.

If I remember correctly the worst reading came from a copy of 'No Jacket Required' by Phil Collins with a total of over 250 = about 5 a minute. Would that really degrade the sound that much? After all it was not a continuous process.

I still have the player, maybe I should hook up the modification again; to see what the quality of recent pressings are like.

 

[Andrew Everard]

pwiles19:Did any of them work.

Never too sold on green pens and rings, and of course not possible to compare the TEAC and Pioneer players with the same electronics fed from conventional mechs, but yes - the VRDS and SPM players sounded very good indeed.

 

[idc]

Andrew Everard:

idc:I asked this on the blog, but no harm in asking again, Andrew, will you have a try at importing one of the CDs onto itunes and make a comparison? Please.

Already tried that, idc, and there's no obvious difference in the sound between standard and 'new-spec' CDs.

Of course, because the rip is able to use more error-correction, and isn't happening in real-time (as the data-extraction is when simply playing a disc), that's exactly as you would expect it to be.

Thanks Andrew.

 

[Anonymous]

JohnDuncan:Discussed here

Interesting reading - suggesting that the manufacture of a CD can turn modest spinners into better ones. Thoughts?

Interesting, although I doubt that anyone can really hear the odd missing bit. It has to start skipping before it's noticeable.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Ah, the old 'bits is bits and all CD players sound the same' standpoint.

Next you'll be telling us that mains cables don't make a difference, there is no god, homeopathic remedies don't work and Fred Scuttle wasn't real.

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:
Ah, the old 'bits is bits and all CD players sound the same' standpoint.

Next you'll be telling us that mains cables don't make a difference, there is no god, homeopathic remedies don't work and Fred Scuttle wasn't real.

Doesn't follow because all CD players don't sound the same. Fred Scuttle? Wasn't he a Benny Hill character?

 

[Andrew Everard]

Ah fine, and yes.

 

[chebby]

Yes a bitstream is a bitstream, but the bits being read can also be seen as a radio frequency signal (11Mhz I think) and there are factors that affect this RF 'signal' in real-time (when viewed as an 'eye pattern' on an oscilloscope) that are not as simple as just conveying a linear stream of bits. Scattering and spurious reflections and even breakthrough of acoustic/mechanical vibration can all affect this 'analogue RF' component of the transmission of the digital bits from the laser pickup and result in jitter.

So care taken by a CD player manufacturer in the suspension, mechanical isolation, and even judicious use of expensive (near IR) light absorbent paint in the right places in the transport can reduce 'interference' to this radio frequency transmission of bits.

Although DACs used in CD players are fairly democratic (and cheap), the quality of components and design in the analogue output stages of a CDP can make a huge difference.