The Absolute Sound (magazine) take on many aspects of computer assisted music reprodu

[rbbert]

Well, their media test results might actually agree with yours?

1. Mitsui MAM-A Gold
2. TY Green
3. Memorex Black/Gold
4. PNY Black Diamond
5. AudioXSell Black
6. HP Silver
7. TDK Silver

[flez007]

One of the more (or less, depending on your level of interest) interesting things about this article is the fact that all the testing was done on two different Windows PC's; no Mac's. With the number of Mac using audiophiles and Mac music servers out there, that alone might lead one to question the article's applicability to the real world of audio, given the kind of judgements the authors are making.

Well...they have just lost me..

[rbbert]

A couple of other assertions that seem questionable to me:

1) Playback of a disc (usually CD?) on a $25 Samsung CD/DVD drive, output S/PDIF coax from "an onboard sound card" to PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC resulted in better sound than the same disc played on PS Perfect Wave Transport (I can't test this one, not having the PS Audio stuff)

2) Ripping at different speeds w/ JRiver, but in each case with a bit-identical rip according to AccurateRip, results in different sound quality when those files are played back from hard drive (this one I can test but absolutely can NOT confirm)

[amirm]

Boy, those are some conclusions! Can't wait to read the article.....

[FrantzM]

A couple of other assertions that seem questionable to me:

<snip> ...
2) Ripping at different speeds w/ JRiver, but in each case with a bit-identical rip according to AccurateRip, results in different sound quality when those files are played back from hard drive (this one I can test but absolutely can NOT confirm)

[rbbert]

Here's another one:

starting with a 24/176.4 track from a Reference Recordings HRxD, upconverting to 24/192 (using Izotope RX Pro) will improve the sound.

[microstrip]

We will find many inconsistencies in the TAS article, mainly because we expect it to be more than what it can ever be.

It is clear from the article that all conclusions are anecdotal, depend a lot on the hardware configuration and on setup options of the software. The authors report their findings and sometimes even comment themselves that they do not understand why and how it happens. Their systematic ranking approach should not be taken absolutely, but has the big advantage of showing clearly in the field a few existing issues of the subject.

IMHO, the article has a very positive aspect - it shows that computer music has real potential, but it is still a very large jungle, where newcomers such as me can be lost easily.

Also, no one should read it without reading part I, that was published in issue 217, as it explains the objectives, the methodology and the ranking system they adopted.

This article is a starter - it shows only a few scenes of the whole film. I hope that those who are experts on this field will comment on it. And those who are naive enough to believe that they can learn everything they will ever need about computer audio reading an article in TAS can use it as as cookbook and shopping list!

[rbbert]

We will find many inconsistencies in the TAS article, mainly because we expect it to be more than what it can ever be. ...

Also, no one should read it without reading part I, that was published in issue 217, as it explains the objectives, the methodology and the ranking system they adopted...

This article is a starter - it shows only a few scenes of the whole film.

The biggest problem I see in this pair of articles is the "mystifying" of computer audio. Yes, certainly there are things we can hear that can't be fully explained (yet), but this pair of articles takes it to an extreme.

I have to believe that if Reference Recordings could improve the sound of their 24/176.4 files by converting them to 24/192 they would be selling those (I certainly don't hear the difference the TAS article describes)

I have to believe that if a $25 drive mechanism sounds better than what PS Audio uses in their $3000 Perfect Wave Transport, they would be using it instead.

The authors of this article make a pretty big deal about both of those "phenomena" and several others of doubtful accuracy. For me, that tends to call into question nearly all of their conclusions, even though my own experience supports many of them.

[microstrip]

(...) I have to believe that if Reference Recordings could improve the sound of their 24/176.4 files by converting them to 24/192 they would be selling those (I certainly don't hear the difference the TAS article describes)

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I have the idea that I read long ago in this forum that some DACs did not sound their best at 176 kHz and performed much better at 192 kHz (or vice-versa). In such case it would be simply an hardware dependency, not a general property.

[Bruce B]

Well, their media test results might actually agree with yours?

1. Mitsui MAM-A Gold
2. TY Green
3. Memorex Black/Gold
4. PNY Black Diamond
5. AudioXSell Black
6. HP Silver
7. TDK Silver

This is solely dependent on the burner. I can get C1 errors at 0.5 and under with any of these discs using the correct burner. A Plextor burner works best on TY media, whereas a Sony works better on TDK and Lite-On with MAM-A. AND I've gotten these results burning 16x OR FASTER!