Видео

Quad ESLs once bitten,forever smitten... I have 57s and stacked and hope to one day have a room to do them justice... SOURCES are easy now..android phone, external DAC....

i'm not a file, i'm a human

I love this clarinet concerto, I've played it with an orchestra featuring Sergio Castello Lopez (Halle orchestra)

Sorry, but I bring serious contention to the 1980 bit. Tug of war 1982 is friggin masterpiece. Its easily his most professional solo album and with George martin and Geoff Emerick plus state of the art tech, it beats the beatles on production quality. Pipes of peace and flowers in the dirt were darn good also.

The best value in DAC with performance thats neutral.

Ive spent a few years trying to figure this out, I work at 24 bit 44.1, would there actually be an advantage to bump up to 32 bit 88.2? Would bouncing it back down to 24 bit 44.1 after end up introducing more issues? When I ask this question I seem to get answers all over the place If someone with a deep knowledge of this could explain this to me it would be greatly appreciated

Ok get what your saying about pop and rock I assume Classical and jazz ( traditional ) are not using this? What's what I listen to post 1995.

I have a thorens td104 turntable I bought just before they were phased out ( before they came back )$280.00 I put in a pickering cartridge that costs about $40 in the 70's this turntable is plastic but had a tonearm, with its own suspension I then replaced the mat with a polymar cork platter at $30 in the seventies and a record clamp at $20 . I bought small rubber discs to install under the feet . The records are all in antistatic sleeves and touched only by the edges and center . No background noise and pleasant sound . Still cds sound better in attack (piano) and bass. But these small improvements really work .Spent more money on musical instruments and composition classes and playing lessons . .

I suppose worrying about crap like this is a way to ignore one’s real issues..

Well.. I heard the pan on my <$10 earbuds. Not an audiophile, I’m a sound engineer, and this sort of thing can be passed off as creative intent.

also heard the clicking of the clarinet player fingering the notes

Wow! There's a blast from the past seeing that album cover at 7:02! Used to borrow a copy of that from our local library (when they leant out records) about 50 years ago. Recognised the commentary voice straight away.

I'm just running an iMac pro, a technics su-z22 amplifier, and 4x Fisher sme-m27 studio speakers 6ohm 120watt. I have more stuff. but only had that amp fired up and on a low volume because its 10pm and my family is going to bed and it's a fairly loud setup. given the low volume I heard the deviation, although tbh i chose to ignore it as i could hear the low youtube video bitrate. now going back to my setup, it's a low to mid range setup formed of 80s japanese stuff. cables aren't special, the amp is just an old amp. and sanyo based 80's fisher speakers are junk (the sme-m27 being a weird deviation in much higher quality over everything else fisher sold, very underrated tbh and very cheap to find(sanyos answer to sony's APM series)) it's not expensive and i heard it through my junk setup XD. hopefully i'll have a nice 5.1 setup with 8 of those fisher speakers soon

I'm still waiting for this mysterious age at which I stop finding new kinds of music compelling. I don't listen to much pop though. But I'm constantly gaining appreciation (and yes, loving) new kinds of music. I'm well into my 20s, but maybe when I'm 30 I'll start being one of those people. new genres I've loved after I turned 20: hyperpop, (not pop)country, bossa nova, drift phonk, and indie folk.. that I can think of. This discussion is always annoying to me because people always say "you just like what you were exposed to when you were younger" and.. I listened to mainly EDM when I was young, and I don't anymore really. I don't count hyperpop, you might count drift phonk, but that makes up only a small bit of what I listen to, and I barely ever listen to the genres I liked back then. I don't hate the music I listened to in my teens, I go back to it sometimes, but I've found thing I enjoy even more.

My take is that the amplifier makes quite a bit of difference if you need to push larger speakers (say for example because you have a larger room) but as long as the amplifier can handle the job without distorting it's pretty hard to hear much of a difference. I recently bought an Arcam A25 and it sounds great to me. In terms of speakers, I like the way B&W sounds but I think it's down to my personal preference (700 series). They do seem to require a bit more power but they sound very clear and have a bass sound that I like. I simply cannot discern a difference between an expensive streamer and my iPhone streaming to my amp's DAC via bluetooth. I really want to because those new streamers are cool ... but I really can't. I have a very expensive VPI turntable (Avenger) and while it probably doesn't sound any different than a Rega (for example) it does, without any doubt, impress the hell out of my friends which is why I bought it. I really want to like tube amplifiers (I do when I play guitar) but having borrowed a friend's McIntosh MC252 that cost about $6,000 ... I don't. It sounded mushy. If it didn't sound bad to me, I'd probably buy one to impress my friends even more, but I wouldn't be able to live with the sound.

Regardless of what you think is the best format, when you play a digital format and amplify it, then the signal becomes analogue so your speakers (transducers) can do their stuff and produce a sound you can understand. Any sound generated that excites your eardrum is effectively mechanical (vibrating air) so without Analogue you would not be able to hear, or should i say, understand your CD, or streamer.

I heard it clearly but...... I do not know the piece so I cannot tell whether it is wrong or not. Being able to hear the faults, if you do not understand them....

I grew up in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and there was a wide range of creativity in so many different genres. The compositions, instrumentations, and singing voices (groups or solo) just simply seemed to have a wider range of creative variety than what I hear today, which seems more 'formula' driven than ever. So am I just a product of my times only? Perhaps somewhat. But I also think there's more to it. For one, I'm a 'trained' singer (classically) for decades(!), and yet I can 'switch hit' (vocally) from literally an operatic tenor aria, to Broadway and 'standards', to even various 'golden oldie' rock tunes. So, in my case, I feel that I'm so 'attuned' (for so many years) to what I consider a 'pretty' sound, be it a ballad or up-tempo number, that that's what seems to capture my musical heart more than anything. And in general, I don't hear or feel that with the 'contemporary' formula music from, say, around the 90's to today. Lastly, I don't attribute my position to 'older ears' as much as I do to 'timeless' quality.

I exclusively use a "Technics, Minifon P55 Plexi". For a true audiophile such as myself, wire recording is the only way to truly experience music in the way the artist intended. I listen on my Vintage Grundig Raumklang Model:GD1445 Stereo Hi-Fi Floor Speakers. For the distinctive audiophile ear I have, no speaker made after 1960 and outside of Germany will suffice.

I agree

Despite phase issues, we can hear stereo. So I guess not everything is an issue and the microsecond time difference makes stereo music a goed experience

DO ASMR!!!

Excellent. You should do ASMR, amigo.

I really didn't start thinking music became just noise until my 30s. For me, it's the electronic drums with bopps and sleeps. Please, just give me a guitar and a cool riff again.

I was going to grab one of these based on your review, but I realized I don't have any rips at 768kHz in my collection. Rats, will have to start all over again.

What a great review. Betty should do deadpan stand-up comedy on the side to earn extra income, because she uttered some of that stuff without cracking up once. This weekend for Father's Day I purchased from a local fellow one of the last consumer-grade tube/valve receivers made by a company that rhymes with "buy an ear" -- just for nostalgia purposes, mind you. I am happy to report some of the harshness of the cathodes has finally begun to burn off this device after 500,000 hours.

What I hears was the clicking in the upper-right channel. But it seems that wasn't the problem.

I've learned a new term: observational Bias.since I have none in this case, I think, with my aged ears, I don't hear any difference, or at least very little.

I heard it, but I wasn't aware that this would be regarded as a defect, as I often watch concerts of this type of music, and soloists are always dancing around! Would you try and correct this in mastering? (If you were the engineer of a recording like this?) By the way, this channel is such a resource for those who waste money on audiophile "kit". I'm finding it useful as a musician to check to see if my gear is being optimized properly The other day I was auditioning some speakers, I won't embarrass the company, but they played Bohemian Rhapsody, and I noticed both speakers were playing one channel only out of phase, which meant half of Freddie's vocals were missing. No one had noticed in the store all day, including customers who raved about the speaker. (The speaker is a very nice one and looks beautiful) Facepalm....! By the way I think you could definitely do a very interesting video called "Why Top Musicians don't buy expensive hi-fi gear."

Great video! Lots of fascinating comments here. As a researcher of psychoacoustics, sonic illusions, recording, mixing and mastering, I have an interesting viewpoint based on empirical observation that may be overlooked here. The discussion here reminds me of a topic many engineers are passionate about - the panning of drums and tom-tom drum fills. Some hold to the school of thought that since tom-toms are set up in a horizontal plane and (for a right-handed drummer) are played from the smallest, high-pitched, tom on the right when facing the drummer, to the largest, lowest-pitched tom on the left - then naturally, and applying common sense, it would sound more "natural" and "organic" to pan the highest tom to the right, the tom in the middle to the center and the lowest toms to the left. Same for a piano - the highest notes are on the right and the lowest are on the left - so many engineers record and pan the piano keyboard from right to left. Same for the entire orchestra - some engineers mix the orchestra with definite panning - contrabasses far left (corresponding to their location on the stage), and so on for other sections, such as percussion to the right (timpani in the center), high strings on the left, etc., etc. What's being missed here is firstly - there's nothing "wrong" with panning music any which way an artist or engineer wants. We are dealing with art, and art is an expression of creativity to produce an emotional effect. So, there are no "standard rules" for panning - only preferences, opinions and subjectivity. That being said, the observation that I see missed here is this: if you are in the audience listening to an orchestra, or a rock band, or a pianist, by the time the sound reaches you, it has been "mixed" and "melded together" -- and "tossed" like a salad, with all the elements of the recording (all the separate individual instruments and/or voices) blended together by that bonus member of the band or orchestra or solo performance -- THE ROOM. The millions of echoes that bounce off the walls, ceiling and floor (as well as other objects and people) create what is known as natural ambiance, reverb, delay and what I describe as "spacial compositing" (a phenomenon whereby the further back a listener is situated, the less discreet "panning" exists from the sound source. Drums fills at a rock concert (unless the sound engineer has hard panned the toms), do NOT sound like they are moving from the right to the left. The toms come at you together - mostly in the center and spread a bit wider by the natural reverb and delay of the room. Same for an entire orchestra. Same for a piano. Now, getting creative and panning the drums, or piano, or the orchestra to create the viewpoint of the performer (who definitely hears the natural "panning") is a creative choice and can be quite cool. In the instance of this clarinet, I did hear the phasing issues of the clarinet (caused by multiple mics up close and the movements of the player). For me, this took away from enjoying the performance. Why? Because no listener would ever experience that movement to such a degree because they would not be up on stage with the clarinetist as the microphones were. The solution? You guessed it (if you're following the trail of hidden simple wisdom here) -- one or two mics further away from the performer will solve the phasing caused by close micing with multiple mics. And the recording will sound and feel more pleasant - even to the untrained ear. Here's a more detailed breakdown: A co-axial array of two microphones for orchestral recording is a technique where two microphones are positioned one directly behind the other, along the same axis. This can be achieved with a specialized microphone bar or a stereo microphone with capsules arranged co-axially. Here's how it affects phasing and panning: Phasing: Phasing issues occur when sound from the same source reaches the microphones at slightly different times, causing partial cancellation and an unnatural comb filtering effect. A co-axial array minimizes this because the microphones are very close together, reducing the time difference for sound waves to reach them. Unnatural Panning: In a traditional stereo recording setup with spaced microphones, instruments closer to one mic might be panned more to that side in the final mix. This can create an artificial stereo image that doesn't accurately represent the orchestra's natural positioning. A co-axial array offers a more focused stereo image, with less emphasis on extreme left and right panning. It captures a more natural width and depth to the orchestra sound. However, co-axial arrays have limitations: Limited Stereo Width: While it avoids extreme panning, a co-axial array might not capture the full width of a large orchestra compared to a wider spaced microphone setup. Positioning Sensitivity: The success of this technique relies on careful positioning. The distance between the microphones and the orchestra can affect the stereo image and potentially introduce phasing issues if not set correctly. Overall, a co-axial microphone array is a useful tool for orchestral recording. It helps to minimize phasing issues and capture a more natural stereo image, but it might not be the only technique used. Many professional recordings combine co-axial arrays with other microphone placements for a more complete and nuanced sound.

It a bit as with expensive wines. Better to find the type you like and stick to it.

No, one does not need to look for the scratches.

Is it true George recorded bass tracks?

Loved them back then……Love them more so now!❤

Paul McCartney reviwing desks?

I grew up on vinyl I won't go back but for those who want to hassle with it that is great for the artists.

The fact that I heard it through a $25.00 set of Creative computer speakers that are 20 years old tells me that it's a good recording more than I'm an audiophile.

I must have about $500 ears, considering most gear in my system are around $500 USD per individual piece. I’d rather have $1000 ears, but, honestly I didn’t hear a single preferable sound from a set of KEF towers that ran about five times as much as my $500-ish pair of Q-Acoustics.

3M plastic polish works well to polish CD surfaces. I would suggest not using brasso, it has chemicals in it that can seriously damage the plastic surface.

Great, no-nonsense videos, clearly reasoned and supported. That said, I know of one very talented professional artist who grows and sells his own pumpkins, so there's that... 🥲

Well said. I'm sure many an enthusiast would be aghast to know that I stack a high level of 7" 45 rpm records on my Dual 1019 (idler wheel) record changer and enjoy each time a record falls and starts playing a different top 40 single. And the whole experience is a marvel when friends get to experience the process, smiling, and carrying on (dare I say they are gobsmacked) at seeing such an engineering marvel of a contraption?!?

Thanks for this!!!!

I prefer the 24Bit headroom. I don't have to push an amp as hard to get great levels that sound clean, But this argument is going crazy as of late with audiophiles pushing insane levels 32bit at 192khz at people "ROFLMAO" It's crazy snake oil imo-- I suppose with these new insane levels more subliminal garbage can be added to the audio signal that only machines & can hear or even tolerate. I wish companies would concentrate better on making quality gear cheaper instead of overtaxed hardware pushing audio humans can't even use on a general basis.

I've have met people that honestly can't hear the difference in high end speakers. As 1 couple swore that dose are the best sounding speakers ever and nothing comes close to them. Another person swore that beats headphones were the best sounding headphones and that all the others had less detail and everything else. Same went for the couple and the bose speakers.

You're right. Maybe fewer mics would have been enough, or maybe there's a stereo pair too close to the soloist, but then he would be 'lost' - not more than in a concert, but certainly in terms of concerto recording expectations. So how do you resolve the problem of a wildly shifting stereo image? And there's the unrealistic change in timbre, plus presence of air leak and key noise coming from those clarinet mics. You wouldn't hear those things in the concert. I can't remember the last time I heard a clarinet recording with none of those issues.

It is funny how someone thinks that recording something, then putting on youtube, will make someone else being able to hear what the person recording was able to hear. It is not about youtube lossy compression, in theory it is but in reality it is very small loss of fidelity. The problem is, LOL, in 1) recording equipment, and more importantly, 2) listening equipment on the other side. You can't demonstrate how combination of amplifier and speakers, recorded in your room, with your devices, sounds, being played on the listener's equipment in his room. What he is hearing is mostly how his equipment sounds, not how your equipment sounds. LOL again. With that being said, I love your channel, videos and presentations.

the perfect analogue format is 'live music'

I loved my 8-track tape deck in 1964 Pontiac Lemans!

Seems you’ve added decapitator in front of guitar . Add it to a separate channel and send clean signal to that channel. Otherwise it sounds like noise