My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 5:01:50 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 2:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 2/17/16 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 12:11 PM, John H. wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI

Enjoy.


Telarc has put out a number of Super Audio CD's, this being one of them.

Hopefully, you have a Super Audio CD player (Sony) and
amplifier/receiver that
will accept it's 6 channel output with each channel having a dedicated,
discrete input. The amp/receiver must be then put in direct, 6 channel
mode, (often called "Multi-Channel Input" driving a main left, main
right, center, left rear, right rear and subwoofer. Most Telarc SACD
are hybrid, meaning they will also play on a conventional CD player but
you will lose superior fidelity of a SACD recording. Conventional,
digital "Surround Sound" ... be it 5.1 or 7.1 is *not* SACD.

In addition, SACD's are recorded completely differently than a regular
CD. It's complicated and hard to explain but it uses phase modulation
rather than amplitude modulation. Basically, it's much like the
fidelity difference between AM and FM radio. Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz which means it can't
broadcast the full audio frequency spectrum that the human ear can
detect. FM, in addition to being frequency modulated rather than
amplitude modulated has a 200Khz bandwidth.

The only negative about SACD's is the limited number of them available
and the fact that Sony is the only manufacturer of SACD players (last I
knew).



My criteria is how much do the "super" CDs sound like a live concert.
The few I have heard on really good sound systems sound over-engineered
to me, sort of like an AUDI car. They sure as hell don't sound like you
are sitting in the expensive seats at a serious music concert.

A lot of issues there Harry. One is the sound system itself, it's
positioning and how much of a sound stage it can create without benefit
of creative mixing and recording. Also, I really do not care for
surround sound where the rear or side speakers are producing an
unnatural sound stage. You don't sit in the middle of a band or
orchestra when listening to music. The better recordings will capture
the subtle reflections of sound from the rear, and the audio system
needs to be adjusted and set up so they are not exaggerated.

It's just simple-minded to think that more accurate recordings are "over engineered". They are just more likely to expose the shortcomings of the equipment you are listening to them on, and your ears are fooling you even more to think what you've been hearing in the past is somehow better.

I like simple, 2 channel stereo with well recorded music. A dipole
speaker design ... like your maggies or the Martin Logans I had work
well to produce a sound stage *if* you have them positioned properly.
So will the old Bose 901's when properly set up.

I have to depart from you there. Bose 901s (or any of the Bose stuff) suffers from the "Bose" sound... highly tweaked and compensated. Not a fan at all.

BTW, the sound stage can be 3 dimensional when set up well. Not just
left to right, but fore and aft as well. A well set up system will
create a sound illusion that "places the instruments or vocals.

Yep. Someone can have highly rated and well-thought of equipment, but if it's not staged properly in the listening room, it will fail.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:11:40 -0500, John H.
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI

Enjoy.

===

Thanks John, very nice performance and recording. That work has
always been one of my favorite symphonies. We once saw Leonard
Bernstein conduct it late in his career with the NY Philharmonic at
Lincoln Center.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:45:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/17/2016 3:21 PM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 2/17/2016 1:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 1:01 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:36:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz

That is why most records made in the 60s and earlier sound like they
do. They were mixed to play on the radio. It wasn't until "hi fi" LPs
came around that you started getting decent sound. Even those got
"remastered" for CDs. When you play old tunes on a good system that
limitation becomes immediately apparent. I doubt the original source
material even exists to remaster them in a lot of cases. I suppose
they can try to expand the sound digitally but it will just be a guess
about what it was supposed to be.



I don't think the old recordings were purposely mixed to play on the
radio. High quality recordings were being made in the 30's and 40's.
They just don't sound very good on AM. Also .. that 10Khz bandwidth
is really only 5Khz available for audio modulation. The 10Khz is the
total of what the allocated spectrum is above and below the carrier
frequency. So, you are only hearing up to 5Khz.


Amplitude modulation

AM is "amplitude modulation" however what I was referring to is what
the "modulation" is. AM has a 5khz band for audio, 5Khz on each side of
the carrier freq for a total of 10Khz. For example:

WBZ in Boston transmits on a carrier frequency of 1030Khz. If they
modulate that carrier with a 1hz test tone (audio) the frequencies
received by the AM radio are 1031Khz and 1029Khz. In the old days the
1029Khz would be discarded but I think they use that side of the carrier
freq for station ID info and attempts at AM stereo.

The AM receiver has a "beat frequency oscillator" which is tuned to the
carrier freq of 1030Khz. The oscillator freq (1030Khz) and the received
transmitted freq (with the test tone) are "beat" together in a
superheterodyne circuit which yields the original freqs, the sum of the
freqs and the difference between the freqs. The difference is what is
used, being the 1Khz tone which is sent to the amplifier section and
then to the speaker. But, the maximum *audio* modulation can only be 5Khz.

===

Richard, with all due respect, that's not quite the way it works. The
classic AM receivers of our youth, and many of the current generation,
were super hetrodyne receivers. They used something called a local
oscillator to down convert the signal to a fixed Intermediate
Frequency (IF), typically 455 KHz. From there the signal was sent to
the Detector circuit which rectifed it and thus recovered the audio
portion.

The circuit you describe with a Beat Frequency Oscilator (BFO) is the
way CW and SSB transmissions are received. Typically the BFO
frequency would be at or near the IF, e.g., 455 KHz.

You're absolutely correct that the audio maximum frequency of a
standard AM radio is 5 KHz. That's an arbitrary limit imposed by
broadcasting standards used to keep stations from interfering with
other nearby frequencies.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 8:05:35 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:28:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/17/16 6:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 17:28:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:38:31 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/17/16 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 12:11 PM, John H. wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI

Enjoy.


Telarc has put out a number of Super Audio CD's, this being one of them.

Hopefully, you have a Super Audio CD player (Sony) and
amplifier/receiver that
will accept it's 6 channel output with each channel having a dedicated,
discrete input. The amp/receiver must be then put in direct, 6 channel
mode, (often called "Multi-Channel Input" driving a main left, main
right, center, left rear, right rear and subwoofer. Most Telarc SACD
are hybrid, meaning they will also play on a conventional CD player but
you will lose superior fidelity of a SACD recording. Conventional,
digital "Surround Sound" ... be it 5.1 or 7.1 is *not* SACD.

In addition, SACD's are recorded completely differently than a regular
CD. It's complicated and hard to explain but it uses phase modulation
rather than amplitude modulation. Basically, it's much like the
fidelity difference between AM and FM radio. Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz which means it can't
broadcast the full audio frequency spectrum that the human ear can
detect. FM, in addition to being frequency modulated rather than
amplitude modulated has a 200Khz bandwidth.

The only negative about SACD's is the limited number of them available
and the fact that Sony is the only manufacturer of SACD players (last I
knew).




My criteria is how much do the "super" CDs sound like a live concert.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On 2/17/2016 10:17 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:45:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/17/2016 3:21 PM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 2/17/2016 1:21 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 1:01 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:36:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz

That is why most records made in the 60s and earlier sound like they
do. They were mixed to play on the radio. It wasn't until "hi fi" LPs
came around that you started getting decent sound. Even those got
"remastered" for CDs. When you play old tunes on a good system that
limitation becomes immediately apparent. I doubt the original source
material even exists to remaster them in a lot of cases. I suppose
they can try to expand the sound digitally but it will just be a guess
about what it was supposed to be.



I don't think the old recordings were purposely mixed to play on the
radio. High quality recordings were being made in the 30's and 40's.
They just don't sound very good on AM. Also .. that 10Khz bandwidth
is really only 5Khz available for audio modulation. The 10Khz is the
total of what the allocated spectrum is above and below the carrier
frequency. So, you are only hearing up to 5Khz.


Amplitude modulation

AM is "amplitude modulation" however what I was referring to is what
the "modulation" is. AM has a 5khz band for audio, 5Khz on each side of
the carrier freq for a total of 10Khz. For example:

WBZ in Boston transmits on a carrier frequency of 1030Khz. If they
modulate that carrier with a 1hz test tone (audio) the frequencies
received by the AM radio are 1031Khz and 1029Khz. In the old days the
1029Khz would be discarded but I think they use that side of the carrier
freq for station ID info and attempts at AM stereo.

The AM receiver has a "beat frequency oscillator" which is tuned to the
carrier freq of 1030Khz. The oscillator freq (1030Khz) and the received
transmitted freq (with the test tone) are "beat" together in a
superheterodyne circuit which yields the original freqs, the sum of the
freqs and the difference between the freqs. The difference is what is
used, being the 1Khz tone which is sent to the amplifier section and
then to the speaker. But, the maximum *audio* modulation can only be 5Khz.

===

Richard, with all due respect, that's not quite the way it works. The
classic AM receivers of our youth, and many of the current generation,
were super hetrodyne receivers. They used something called a local
oscillator to down convert the signal to a fixed Intermediate
Frequency (IF), typically 455 KHz. From there the signal was sent to
the Detector circuit which rectifed it and thus recovered the audio
portion.

The circuit you describe with a Beat Frequency Oscilator (BFO) is the
way CW and SSB transmissions are received. Typically the BFO
frequency would be at or near the IF, e.g., 455 KHz.

You're absolutely correct that the audio maximum frequency of a
standard AM radio is 5 KHz. That's an arbitrary limit imposed by
broadcasting standards used to keep stations from interfering with
other nearby frequencies.


We are saying the same thing. I just left out the the 455Khz
intermediate freq for simplicity. The BFO (controlled by your tuning
dial or pushbutton) is tuned to the carrier freq however, as I recall
and not to the fixed, IF frequency. If that were the case you couldn't
select any particular broadcast frequency.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:21:10 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/17/2016 1:01 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:36:05 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz

That is why most records made in the 60s and earlier sound like they
do. They were mixed to play on the radio. It wasn't until "hi fi" LPs
came around that you started getting decent sound. Even those got
"remastered" for CDs. When you play old tunes on a good system that
limitation becomes immediately apparent. I doubt the original source
material even exists to remaster them in a lot of cases. I suppose
they can try to expand the sound digitally but it will just be a guess
about what it was supposed to be.



I don't think the old recordings were purposely mixed to play on the
radio. High quality recordings were being made in the 30's and 40's.
They just don't sound very good on AM. Also .. that 10Khz bandwidth
is really only 5Khz available for audio modulation. The 10Khz is the
total of what the allocated spectrum is above and below the carrier
frequency. So, you are only hearing up to 5Khz.


That is what I hear quite often when talking about top 40 hits.

I agree there were recordings at higher quality but they were not on
AM radio that much. In those days FM was "long hair" music and the
kids had crew cuts or flat tops.
You can really hear it when you listen to the Brill building music.
It is very "thin".

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:03:03 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 17:28:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:38:31 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/17/16 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 12:11 PM, John H. wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI

Enjoy.


Telarc has put out a number of Super Audio CD's, this being one of them.

Hopefully, you have a Super Audio CD player (Sony) and
amplifier/receiver that
will accept it's 6 channel output with each channel having a dedicated,
discrete input. The amp/receiver must be then put in direct, 6 channel
mode, (often called "Multi-Channel Input" driving a main left, main
right, center, left rear, right rear and subwoofer. Most Telarc SACD
are hybrid, meaning they will also play on a conventional CD player but
you will lose superior fidelity of a SACD recording. Conventional,
digital "Surround Sound" ... be it 5.1 or 7.1 is *not* SACD.

In addition, SACD's are recorded completely differently than a regular
CD. It's complicated and hard to explain but it uses phase modulation
rather than amplitude modulation. Basically, it's much like the
fidelity difference between AM and FM radio. Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz which means it can't
broadcast the full audio frequency spectrum that the human ear can
detect. FM, in addition to being frequency modulated rather than
amplitude modulated has a 200Khz bandwidth.

The only negative about SACD's is the limited number of them available
and the fact that Sony is the only manufacturer of SACD players (last I
knew).




My criteria is how much do the "super" CDs sound like a live concert.
The few I have heard on really good sound systems sound over-engineered
to me, sort of like an AUDI car. They sure as hell don't sound like you
are sitting in the expensive seats at a serious music concert.

BTW .. a true "audiophile" (which I am *not*) would be dismayed at the
sight of a bass or treble control or any other circuit that "colors" the
sound of the recording. I am not that far gone with this stuff. Living
rooms and listening areas vary acoustically and really can't duplicate a
concert hall or your local live music hot spot.

I've played with audio stuff for years but have pretty much lost
interest in it. I am cleaning out our house and you wouldn't believe
the gear I am tossing. Came across a big box *full* of directional
audio connects that must have cost a fortune to accumulate over the
years. Problem is, I never bought into the "directional" BS to begin
with. The idea is that the capacitive reactance changes along it's
length and the directional cables compensate for any losses.
My problem with that is that at audio frequencies there is *no*
capacitive or inductive reactance generated anyway. At higher freqs ..
like RF ... yes, the transmission line becomes reactive to frequency but
not at audio freqs.


I'm in the market for a new computer sound system. The one I've got now doesn't do
justice to the 'normal' Telarc.

I bought my wife a Bose "computer" speaker set that is as good as the
old sound systems we grew up with that had coffin sized speaker boxes.

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:08:51 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

We are saying the same thing. I just left out the the 455Khz
intermediate freq for simplicity. The BFO (controlled by your tuning
dial or pushbutton) is tuned to the carrier freq however, as I recall
and not to the fixed, IF frequency. If that were the case you couldn't
select any particular broadcast frequency.

===

It's a matter of standard terminology.

The local oscilator (LO) is what allows you to select stations by
frequency. The BFO is specialized for CW and SSB reception and many
(most) radios do not have a BFO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Superheterodyne_receiver_block_diagram_2.svg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_frequency_oscillator

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:04:50 -0500,
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:08:51 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

We are saying the same thing. I just left out the the 455Khz
intermediate freq for simplicity. The BFO (controlled by your tuning
dial or pushbutton) is tuned to the carrier freq however, as I recall
and not to the fixed, IF frequency. If that were the case you couldn't
select any particular broadcast frequency.

===

It's a matter of standard terminology.

The local oscilator (LO) is what allows you to select stations by
frequency. The BFO is specialized for CW and SSB reception and many
(most) radios do not have a BFO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Superheterodyne_receiver_block_diagram_2.svg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_frequency_oscillator

Where does the cats whisker fit in there? ;-)

My favorite Telarc CD
 

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:31:08 -0800 (PST), Its Me wrote:

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 8:05:35 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:28:53 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/17/16 6:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 17:28:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:38:31 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/17/16 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/17/2016 12:11 PM, John H. wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDxGQ5t4lvI

Enjoy.


Telarc has put out a number of Super Audio CD's, this being one of them.

Hopefully, you have a Super Audio CD player (Sony) and
amplifier/receiver that
will accept it's 6 channel output with each channel having a dedicated,
discrete input. The amp/receiver must be then put in direct, 6 channel
mode, (often called "Multi-Channel Input" driving a main left, main
right, center, left rear, right rear and subwoofer. Most Telarc SACD
are hybrid, meaning they will also play on a conventional CD player but
you will lose superior fidelity of a SACD recording. Conventional,
digital "Surround Sound" ... be it 5.1 or 7.1 is *not* SACD.

In addition, SACD's are recorded completely differently than a regular
CD. It's complicated and hard to explain but it uses phase modulation
rather than amplitude modulation. Basically, it's much like the
fidelity difference between AM and FM radio. Many people don't realize
that AM radio's bandwidth is limited to 10Khz which means it can't
broadcast the full audio frequency spectrum that the human ear can
detect. FM, in addition to being frequency modulated rather than
amplitude modulated has a 200Khz bandwidth.

The only negative about SACD's is the limited number of them available
and the fact that Sony is the only manufacturer of SACD players (last I
knew).




My criteria is how much do the "super" CDs sound like a live concert.
The few I have heard on really good sound systems sound over-engineered
to me, sort of like an AUDI car. They sure as hell don't sound like you
are sitting in the expensive seats at a serious music concert.

BTW .. a true "audiophile" (which I am *not*) would be dismayed at the
sight of a bass or treble control or any other circuit that "colors" the
sound of the recording. I am not that far gone with this stuff. Living
rooms and listening areas vary acoustically and really can't duplicate a
concert hall or your local live music hot spot.

I've played with audio stuff for years but have pretty much lost
interest in it. I am cleaning out our house and you wouldn't believe
the gear I am tossing. Came across a big box *full* of directional
audio connects that must have cost a fortune to accumulate over the
years. Problem is, I never bought into the "directional" BS to begin
with. The idea is that the capacitive reactance changes along it's
length and the directional cables compensate for any losses.
My problem with that is that at audio frequencies there is *no*
capacitive or inductive reactance generated anyway. At higher freqs ..
like RF ... yes, the transmission line becomes reactive to frequency but
not at audio freqs.


I'm in the market for a new computer sound system. The one I've got now doesn't do
justice to the 'normal' Telarc.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!



I have some "M-Audio" speakers hooked up to my imac.

Like these:

http://www.amazon.com/M-Audio-Studio.../dp/B000MUXJCO

They sound pretty good.

Funny, if you scroll down to see the current version, they're cheaper than the
previous version you have. I wonder what the differences are. The reviews for both
seem pretty good.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!

The Klipsch Promedia 2.1 are good, too.

I wonder how those compare to these from Harmon Kardon

http://tinyurl.com/zu45alt

Both sets get pretty good reviews from the Amazon crowd.

But, I think I'm getting it narrowed down to a couple choices rather than a couple
hundred.

Thanks.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, and narcissists...not guns!