Now, I've never particularly been a Spectral fan, finding their older gear somewhat representative of what was once described as the "CA sound." Very analytical and cold, at times verging on icy.
do you believe theres a "ca sound"?
Now, I've never particularly been a Spectral fan, finding their older gear somewhat representative of what was once described as the "CA sound." Very analytical and cold, at times verging on icy.
It not "listed" as a non profit.
If I take what lasercd said in his post, as it was written, that is NOT what you are saying.
-Having heard many RR 176.4 recordings AND the corresponding HDCD, there was no comparison. Period.
-Keith may "feel" HDCD is "better" but it is not. DSD is superior technically, and subjectively. HDCD is STILL 44.1/16.
What do you mean SACD is not DSD? Huh? An SACD, played back on a decent SACD player is DSD ALL the way unit the analog outputs.
SACDs done correctly are the best digital there is. We are not talking about upsampled PCM and all that other nonsense.
I agree that the sample rate, bit depth, and format of a recording is TOTALLY secondary to the care taken in the mastering.
Have you heard Analogue Productions, Audio Fidelity, MoFi, and most of Gus Skinas's SACDs? I'm thinking not.
Have you heard the aforementioned recordings on Keith's SOTA system? You're conclusions might be different.
they're indeed registered in CA as a coporation since 1984.
Have you heard the aforementioned recordings on Keith's SOTA system? Your conclusions might be different.
And go back as far as Mark Levinson's comments about SACD-->PCM many years ago too.
And you think wrong.
Probably not. An HDCD identical to the master? Ok, lets call it a day..no need for high rez PCM downloads..
C'mon man.
I would also like to know have you had a reference quality SACD player in your system? I don't see one listed.
I would guess not. Tell me if I am wrong.
You're funny Andre. I don't ever remember inviting you to my place yet you seem to know everything about what's in my system. Just because one isn't listed doesn't mean one hasn't been in my system.
One other thing that Terry said was that Spectral is run as a non-profit and therefore they are able to keep the price of their equipment lower. First off I never thought of Spectral gear as inexpensive. Is this really true? Is Spectral run as a non-profit organization?
If I take what lasercd said in his post, as it was written, that is NOT what you are saying.
-Having heard many RR 176.4 recordings AND the corresponding HDCD, there was no comparison. Period.
-Keith may "feel" HDCD is "better" but it is not. DSD is superior technically, and subjectively. HDCD is STILL 44.1/16.
FWIW, let me clarify a couple of things, because words are distorted from mouth to mouth: 1) RR hi-rez material is also HDCD encoded; 2) Related to what Myles said - that Keith Johnson has optimized his machine for redbook/HDCD playback and that he [Keith] feels right now that's the best sound - see also this comment from Bernice @Spectral in this post: "What I will say, the SDR4000SL has playback quality very similar to Hi res files. We know this from real world experience." The point being that Terry didn't rally say, Terry is just relaying others' info... Finally, regarding HDCD, see also this http://www.martinloganowners.com/forum/showthread.php?10545-HDCD-reading-the-patent post.
Let me put on my straight-shooter hat... my point is that Terry is not a charlatan, so let's put this to rest.
do you believe theres a "ca sound"?then again my expat NY friends constantly remind me you cant find a decent bagel in cali, or "you call that cheesecake?!" i guess we cant do anything right
![]()
![]() | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | ![]() | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator | ![]() | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |