We can argue about all of these technical points Chu until the cows come home....But why bother....it's been done hundreds of times before....It's probably being done on another forum as we speak! Some of your post clearly opinion based but you have written it as if it's factual. Comments like...."but that's usually not much of a problem."
That's right. It's not usually much of a problem. In fact, it's so exceedingly rare that it belongs on the endangered species list! Find me several units, regardless of price, where the AC harmonics, (multiples of 60 Hz) are not only present, but rise to the level of audibility. Even in the POS 5 figure Zanden unit the AC harmonics, while present are pretty far down in signal strength. Look at the following graph and note the two circled pairs at the center-bottom.
If we're arguing, it's because you can't provide any damned information to corroborate your statement making it at best a conspiracy theory.
By the way I clearly stated upsampling not oversampling.
Upsampling merely resamples the signal at a rate higher than it's currently at. Nothing more. Resampling can't and doesn't improve the resolution of a signal. Whatever the dynamic range of the signal is, is it. You can't go beyond it. Maybe you're talking about something else?
Measurable differences do not automatically translate to audible differences....That's right Chu but it also does not mean that they don't. Lets not rule out the possibility that unmeasurable differences don't influence sound as well. The Einstein quote has been used here already.
I haven't. You need a credible test to do this and anecdotal evidence is hardly credible.
Some day I may decide to undertake some unsighted, level matched comparison. Perhaps then, I may find that these differences ain't as different as I think. But then again I might actually find the differences are actually larger than I already think now. Just for interest sake have you taken such a test?
Yes, and so have others. You need to find a way to bring normalize the player's outputs. What you could do though, in the meantime, is simply obtain a multimeter and some test tones. Let's say the tones are at 100, 1000 and 10000 Hz. Get some players in, hook them up to your system, measure and record the voltages at the speaker terminals. I don't know if it was in this thread or another, a member noted they'd done this using a RS SPL meter and found differences at the listening position. Once they made adjustments to bring them into line, the two CD players kinda started to sound the same. Now, the SPL meter is very crude. I recommend the multimeter because it's more accurate and frankly simpler. Just see what you get. AFAIK
, the main reason why voltages can and do vary so much is simply because the CD spec is 2 volts rather than something like 2.00 or 2.000. It gives manufacturers greater leeway and cuts down costs.
All of my posts have been in response to comments that there is no difference at all in CD players. I think and many others here do not believe from actually listening experience and think that it is technically not possible that there is absolutely NO and I mean NO, NONE, ZILCH, ZIPPO difference in sound between CD sources.
That's not my position but when you start to exert more control over how you listen...truly listen with your ears and not your eyes too...you might find that output level and expectation account for an enormous amount of the purported differences. That doesn't mean you should buy the cheapest player out there. There are other factors just as there are other factors in why you buy a watch. What it does mean though is that it's entirely reasonable and believable that a person, on an incredibly tight budget can buy a damned inexpensive player, be it a CDP, multiformat, or DVD and have full confidence that the audio quality is indistinguishable from a Meridian or an Ayre. Spec's aren't as good. Remote 'might' be cheesier. Might be a little slower with track changing. Won't be exlusive. Might even say Samsung. But...
On a side note, I take it you're familiar with the work on audible differences done over at matrix hi-fi?
I have never stated how big these differences are and if you look back at one of my previous posts i clearly state that improving your speakers will yield a much larger return in sound quality. I think you have clearly overestimated how much I think they differ. By the way there's no need to swear. This hobby is suppose to be fun so lets keep it that way.
Fair enough. Consider for a moment though, is it fun for the people selling these things or are they in this to make a buck? They're telling you not to sweat it. It's a hobby. Don't subject it to scientific scrutiny. Why should they get off the hook not telling you all there is to know?
Why would I be talking about DAC's for different purposes? This is a CD player forum and that's the topic here. I'm not talking about Video DAC's etc. Of course I'm talking about audio DAC's. There are measurable differences in audio DAC's. What.....You don't believe me?
There are audio DAC's designed to go into portables, set top boxes, sound cards. There are DACs that also incorporate additional features such as attenuation, muting, ability to trim both channels. Some do. Some don't. Some play other formates like CDR's. Some do other things. That is what I meant by different purposes. If you look at the manufacturer's data sheets you'll find suggestions for some of their intended use. Yes, they have different measurements but so what? It's nice to have things like dual differential DACs that push the limit. Really, that's impressive to me and I like to see things get technically better. OTOH, it's nice to know that a player that doesn't represent the current state of the art can be its indistinguishable audible equal. Maybe not. It's gonna take some work to find out. That is, if you care.
Would you like a copy of the article I referenced classic77? Drop me a PM.