Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!whuxlb!pyuxll!eisx!npoiv!npois!hogpc!houxm!whuxk!wjm From: wjm@whuxk.UUCP Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Right.On,Greg! Message-ID: <254@whuxk.UUCP> Date: Thu, 18-Aug-83 09:25:30 EDT Article-I.D.: whuxk.254 Posted: Thu Aug 18 09:25:30 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 18-Aug-83 21:49:55 EDT Lines: 49 Greg's challege is the right way to answer the questions about CD's. As I've said in earlier articles posted to net.audio, the CD MEDIUM has the potential for excellent sound, although some of the earliest CD's (especially those from some of the "major" record companies who are also noted for foisting digitally mastered recordings with an "audiophile recording" sticker on the shrink wrap and $2 added to the price) did not live up to the medium's potential. As for lists of Good and Bad CD's, both "Audio" and "Stereo Review" have listed CD's which their record reviewers have auditioned - Some have gotten outstanding reviews (mostly Telarcs or recordings made by similar techniques with a minimum 2 or 3, number of microphones), while others, generally multi-miked productions have gotten properly canned. I'd still like to know (which is what started this discussion on the net) how to tell if CD player A is better/the same/worse than CD player B and what measurements that can be verified in the lab correlate to sound quality - Based on the reviews I've seen so far, it seems that the Kyocera DA-01 seems to be one of the better ones. I can't believe that ALL CD players will be equal in sound quality - there are too many manufacturers with different philosophies out there (let's get the best sound we can and *&%$$%% the price - e.g. Nakamichi, Linn, etc., let's provide the most sound per dollar - Hafler, Ohm and let's put out some cheap trash and compromise on the sound - you know who they are) and that's going to show up in CD players as well. As I've said before, and I'll say it again - I don't know if ringing at 1KHz correlates with CD player performance, but it is something that can be measured in the lab. My point is WE NEED QUANTITATIVE MEASURMENTS FOR CD PLAYERS. As for the MC vs MM debate, in general most high end cartridges are MC's which means that those manufactures who said let's make the best cartridge we can and BLEEP the price have gone that route - in spite of some technical drawbacks (like the need for a head amp or transformer) due to its better frequency response, separation, and insensitvity to preamp loading. I think it is these factors that result in the "better sound" of high-end MC cartridges (many of the same factors apply to the few MM cartridges like the Grace F9 Ruby) which has been verified by A/B tests. Returning to the idea of A/B tests - Linn set these up at the Summer Consumer Electronics Show last month in Chicago (source 9/83 "Stereo Review") to compare CD vs LP recordings using their high end Sondek/Ittok/Atis turntable/arm/cartridge system. With the records they selected, the LP's were preferred to the CD's by the delegates at the show. It would be interesting to repeat this test with Telarc material - I suspect with a good CD player the panel wouldn't be able to tell the difference, especially if the LP's were dbx encoded to reduce surface noise. Not only do these results say how good CD's are, they also show how good LP's can be with modern equipment, so let's enjoy both forms! Bill Mitchell Bell Laboratories - Whippany, NJ (whuxk!wjm) Disclaimer ... The opinions expressed here are my personal ones and are not necessarily those of my employer, Bell Laboratories.