|
Digital Drive Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it. |
|
|
|
Digital Drive Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it. |
|
In Reply to: I Tried Too, And.... posted by Todd Krieger on October 21, 2005 at 09:44:01:
Todd,You wrote:
> At first listen, a digital system utilizing [upsampling]
> does sound impressive. It sounds as if there is
> good ambience retrieval and a sense that the music
> seems "less digitized" compared to typical conversion.
> Then, after my ears get used to the playback, I start
> sensing a high-frequency "noise" setting in-
> Not unlike what one would hear with a TV flyback
> transformer, but higher in frequency than a
> TV flyback transformer and more like a narrow
> band of noise than a distinct "tone." (I don't
> notice this noise initially- only after several
> minutes.) As my ears get further "acclimated,"
> I start noticing the noise kind of "riding"
> on the music, particularly music with a lot of
> high-frequency energy. (Like a continuous high-hat
> in a rock or jazz track.) This noise obscures
> attacks and decays in cymbals and triangles,
> and robs the music of its organic quality. What
> sounds spectacular at first becomes grating
> and fatiguing later.That's very interesting, and I wouldn't dream of
suggesting that you don't hear, or shouldn't be
bothered by, what you're hearing.In fact, the phenomenon sounds similar to an
experience I had back in -- oh, '92 or so, when
I first bought my Quad ESL-63 electrostatic speakers
(used, at Stereo Exchange in New York City).I picked up a second-hand Krell KSA-80 to drive the
Quads with (a class-A solid-state amplifier of
impeccable pedigree). The system thrilled me to death
when I got it home (I was listening to 1992 digital,
of course, which would drive me out of the room
these days -- a Krell SPB-16x DAC and a Sony CD player
used as a transport), but a few
months later I was going crazy trying to pin down
what sounded like high-frequency noise. I thought
I was beginning to suffer from tinnitus! It literally
drove me to tears of frustration on a number
of occasions. The dealer from whom I had bought
the Quads and the Krell amp actually suggested that
the Krell might be oscillating into the load the
Quads presented (shame on him for suggesting that --
what would Dan D'Agostino have said!).Anyway, the only solution turned out to be to ditch
the Krell amp and drive the Quads with tubes (at first
a pair of little 25-watt VTL Tiny Triodes [still have
'em -- backup for the Cary 300SEs! ;-> ], then
a (used) Counterpoint SA-4 OTL tube amp which sounded great
but proved unreliable, then a (used) pair of Jadis JA-80s
[wonderful amps -- I plan to be buried with 'em.
Just kidding.], and finally the AtmaSphere M60 IIs
I'm using now. I would never even think of trying
to go back to solid state with the Quads, even though
the problem may well have had something to do with
the digital source I was using at the time.So I respect your abhorrence for the sound you're
hearing from upsampling.OTOH, the biggest problem I've had with digital is
upper-midrange glare. It sounds like all the
high-frequency energy from, say,
a soprano voice, is "bunching up" at one frequency
around 5 kHz, and producing a laser-like glare
that singes the ears. Or as if the high-frequency
energy is "bouncing back" from the 22kHz Nyquist
limit and winding up at 5 kHz. Upsampling,
to me, seems to "let out" this accumulation of
glare -- let the highs dissipate naturally rather
than bunching up as glare. Digital audio has not,
historically, been the only offender in this area --
vinyl reproduction through bad solid state can
sound just as bad.Jim F.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- One man's poison - JimF 10/21/0512:32:26 10/21/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
