What is the cause of PCM glare? Bad recording or Bad DAC? Anything banish it?

nc42acc

Member Sponsor
Nov 10, 2015
609
40
165
North Carolina
Digital glare I suppose is inherent in the technology when a bad recording accentuates this. I have listened to digital for hours with no ear bleeding glare but with all well recorded material.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
I don't think many of the complaints of early digital are applicable now. It was digital that improved.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Digital glare I suppose is inherent in the technology when a bad recording accentuates this. I have listened to digital for hours with no ear bleeding glare but with all well recorded material.

It seems much more likely that the known quiet, extension and linearity of digital reveals flaws in the recording than the glare is inherent in the tech and only bad recordings reveal it.

Tim
 

nc42acc

Member Sponsor
Nov 10, 2015
609
40
165
North Carolina
Greg I agree 100%. I went from all vinyl to a CD player when they first came out. My friend Scott Nixon was one of the first to modify the Magnavox player with tubes. Even with a modded player digital is 10,000 times better now.

I don't think many of the complaints of early digital are applicable now. It was digital that improved.
 
Last edited:

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
We have come a long way from the days when my opinion of digital was just my imagination fueled by my attachment to vinyl. Digital has gone through several incarnations and continues to progress. Never admitting along the way there was anything wrong.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
We have come a long way from the days when my opinion of digital was just my imagination fueled by my attachment to vinyl. Digital has gone through several incarnations and continues to progress. Never admitting along the way there was anything wrong.

Oh, no. Digital has improved, so of course there was something to improve. I don't think anyone is denying that. What we are supposing is that it has been better than analog, by all objective metrics, for a long, long, time. What you like, of course is another matter.

Tim
 

nc42acc

Member Sponsor
Nov 10, 2015
609
40
165
North Carolina
Analog sounds pretty good to my ears. I can have both technologies coexist in my system and be perfectly happy. Best of both worlds right?

Oh, no. Digital has improved, so of course there was something to improve. I don't think anyone is denying that. What we are supposing is that it has been better than analog, by all objective metrics, for a long, long, time. What you like, of course is another matter.

Tim
 

Whatmore

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2011
1,011
2
438
Melbourne, Australia
We have come a long way from the days when my opinion of digital was just my imagination fueled by my attachment to vinyl. Digital has gone through several incarnations and continues to progress. Never admitting along the way there was anything wrong.

Has digital improved in terms of playback technology or recording (or both)?
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,030
1,503
550
Eastern WA
I don't find very many recordings have an offensive element to them. Yes many sound bad, some are just not that good, etc, but as far as an outright bad sound that isn't that common.

Good recordings reduce the way sound interacts with noise in your DAC, it seems. That statement is almost fo-fo level but clearly it's true from every instance we can account with.

Here's an interest example of something... I went to a fellows house to show him a power conditioner. We played an MP3 off a burned disc, pretty loud, with the power conditioner being used. It was Jethro Tull and he was rocking out pretty loud. Then we didn't touch a single thing but unplugged the stereo from the conditioner and back to the wall. When we hit play it was immediately noticeable how awful the MP3 had become. I had to physically move backwards because my ears were hurting. We didn't even make it through the song. Now when we did the same test with a mere CD the difference was apparent, that the conditioner was an upgrade, but it wasn't so adverse that you had to literally get away from the painful sound.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
primrose_path_12_single_a.jpg
The history of digital is to complicated to cover it here.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,805
4,551
1,213
Greater Boston
Oh, no. Digital has improved, so of course there was something to improve. I don't think anyone is denying that. What we are supposing is that it has been better than analog, by all objective metrics, for a long, long, time. What you like, of course is another matter.

Tim

See my post:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...win-s-High-End&p=380299&viewfull=1#post380299

(See also my follow-up post there on that.)

I now like top-level digital and top-level analog equallly. Digital measures better by some traditional objective metrics, but how relevant this is for the final audible result is of course a matter of debate that we have had for decades now.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
See my post:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...win-s-High-End&p=380299&viewfull=1#post380299

(See also my follow-up post there on that.)

I now like top-level digital and top-level analog equallly. Digital measures better by some traditional objective metrics, but how relevant this is for the final audible result is of course a matter of debate that we have had for decades now.

I'm really don't see any point in the debate, but it rages on. Digital measures better. There is no legitimate debate about that. Analog and digital sound different. There's no debate about that either. And of course, what we like is not a matter of debate. There's no argument to tell someone they don't like something. But somehow that just doesn't keep people from making these broad declarations of the superiority of their preference, as if no one could possibly have a different one.

Tim
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,805
4,551
1,213
Greater Boston
I'm really don't see any point in the debate, but it rages on. Digital measures better. There is no legitimate debate about that. Analog and digital sound different. There's no debate about that either.

No, top-level digital and analog do not sound that different. Please read the post that I linked to, as well as my follow-up post in that thread, about the best examples in both media sounding more like live music and about colorations.
 

Purite Audio

banned
May 28, 2013
417
1
0
www.puriteaudio.co.uk
No, top-level digital and analog do not sound that different. Please read the post that I linked to, as well as my follow-up post in that thread, about the best examples in both media sounding more like live music and about colorations.
I agree ,my vinyl system is as much like digital as I can make it, direct drive turntable, cartridge with a ( relatively ) flat FR ,solid state phono stage with accurate RIAA, vinyl and digital can sound remarkably similar .
Keith.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
No, top-level digital and analog do not sound that different. Please read the post that I linked to, as well as my follow-up post in that thread, about the best examples in both media sounding more like live music and about colorations.

I read it. Whenever anyone begins talking about the impossible reference point of live music, I conclude that they are really talking about preference, probably heavily colored by bias and perception. They're certainly not talking about a system's, or an individual component's ability to reproduce the recording.

Tim
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,805
4,551
1,213
Greater Boston
I read it. Whenever anyone begins talking about the impossible reference point of live music, I conclude that they are really talking about preference, probably heavily colored by bias and perception. They're certainly not talking about a system's, or an individual component's ability to reproduce the recording.

Tim

I disagree, even though I appreciate the point that you have repeatedly made about mikes just not 'hearing' the way we do, leading to necessary compromises on mike positioning.

However, in my follow-up post I specifically addressed the issue of coloration and my conclusions about the DACs performance as apparently being true to the recording:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...win-s-High-End&p=380325&viewfull=1#post380325
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,574
1,792
1,850
Metro DC
I posted it early on, at the inception of this forum. In the beginning there was an attempt to recreate what was heard at our ears. The attempt to reproduce what is heard at the ear was and remains a disaster. With the exception if binaural of course.vStereo is an attemt to mimic the performers, not what is heard at the ears. The fact that a microphone does not "act' like an ear is irrelavant. guitarist.jpg
 

rhyno

Well-Known Member
Dec 29, 2010
65
24
913
quality of recording is preeminent. but with bad recordings, your notice (or minimization) of glare will be contingent on how well you address incoming AC & vibrations (given a reasonable level of CDP quality)
AC: go whole monty: dedicated lines / upgrade duplexes (big fan of oyaide RO and y have compared v Furu GTX) / good cables & route them carefully (i'd offer most IECs sound lousy too--get ATL, they sound best).
vibrations: either star sound shelves (my fave; setup is ingenious), stillpoints (very effective as well), or active vibration control (pricey). funny thing: if you have hard feet, it has higher upside potential but can also cause glare if you do it wrong. soft footers are always a loser. always. so get the hard footers set right.

fix these things before even thinking of upgrading your player.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
I disagree, even though I appreciate the point that you have repeatedly made about mikes just not 'hearing' the way we do, leading to necessary compromises on mike positioning.

However, in my follow-up post I specifically addressed the issue of coloration and my conclusions about the DACs performance as apparently being true to the recording:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...win-s-High-End&p=380325&viewfull=1#post380325

Gaps between live music and recordings are many, and much greater than the way mics "hear," but agreeing to disagree is probably best.

Tim
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing