I'm wondering how others who have a slight harshness with their 950, have addressed this problem.

One approach might be to reduce the treble. I'm curious if that's a good idea, or if it's overkill or underkill. The treble controls are in 2 db increments. I'm not sure at what frequency the treble kicks in and at what slope and I'm also concerned about the treble control possibly introducing artifacts.

Has anyone done any listening tests on the treble? Has anybody measured what the treble control does.

Hey Will:

I don't know of anything in the 950 that can get rid of the harshness. I sensed it more of a 'hardness' or 'glassiness'. Playing with the treble, if it works for you, then there's no reason not to do that, as I don't think that any artifacts would be introduced. If your speakers have a mid-range level control, you might try loweing that a bit; it's worked for me. In my current setup, the reason I use all vacuum tube gear is to overcome the hardness that sometimes creeps into digital audio. Plus toobs just look cool glowing in a darkened room - kinda like candles, but without the fire hazard...

the 950, in my opinion, is not harsh...only very accurate. i have been saying the following since 1982: 16/44.1 is a terrible format. this is why audiophiles choose vinyl or tape. you can't hide the harshness, only mask it.
switch to multichannel sacd or dvd-a.

the 950 sounds terrible when playing a stereo cd. it's because the 950 reproduces the piece of crap accurately. i've listened to a 2" master tape after paying a small fortune to work with a good producer grinning from ear to ear, only to have to settle for the stripped down, garbage version that a cd is.

when i asked a producer who's ears and talent i very much respected, what is up with cds?, he shook his head and replied, "i cannot believe what the american public accepts as quality, but as long as they do, this is what you get".

some master tapes have much less information to have to chop to fit a cd, and therefore, sound better than others. again, this is why most audiophiles gravitate to acoustic music (symphony, jazz quartet, live recordings of both, with or without a great vocalist through a great mic, etc.). it sounds as good as cd can be.

listen to any cd (not the sacd hybrid cd, but one you've had for some time) that you consider to be your reference cd, then listen to the same cd in multichannel sacd.

if you buy the best cd player, the best stereo tube pre, the best speakers on earth...a cd is still a cd. listen to the master tape (or 24/96 digital master) and you will see what i mean.

sacd/dvd-a, on the other hand, come as close to the master aa a copy possibly can. and this is where the 950 SHINES! i know....the software is slow in coming, the standards are being tweaked and good surround music producers are very few. but it's starting to focus and some are downright masterpieces.

i've mentioned jt's "hourglass" and spyro gyra's "in modern times". zero harshness. immense soundstage. tiny details you would never hear on a cd. these are not my 2 favorite artists by any list, yet i listen to these 2 sacds every day just to marvel at how GOOD they sound. yes' "fragile" is coming out on dvd-a this month. i'll buy a dvd-a player just to buy this disc!

if you listen to cds, you are stuck with masking the harshness and abiding the lack of detail, but......WHY? ok, one more time...this 950 sounds GOOD. feed in good and hear good come through it. pitch the cds where they belong.

sorry, soundhound...you can have your soap box back now.

Thank goodness we of the budget world don't have to put up with that inaccurate Meridian and Theta crap that makes just about anything sound so darned good.

[This message has been edited by HT crazed (edited October 06, 2002).]

Well thanks, Bosso, as I climb back on the 'ol soapbox....

I have found that there is an _incredible_ lack of knoledge about the very basics of how to get the signal to CD accurately. It really amazes me the things I hear coming out of the mouths of some of the people who master some of the CDs that we all listen to. Basic things like how to avoid digital clipping for instance...amazing!!! My own take is that the CD standard is acceptable _IF_ there is no more than one generation removed from the master tape, and the listening level is not elevated too much that the digital noise floor is audible. Unfortunately, this is the exception rather than the rule.

One interesting story you might be interested in regarding Dolby digital. When I am on the dubbing stage after all the final mixing is done on a feature film, and am doing my final paperwork, they are usually making the Dolby Digital master of the final film soundtrack. As I am working, I have more than a few times snaped my head up suddenly and said "what is _that_ shit!" The mixing engineers always respond: "Oh, we're playing back the Dolby Digital master to check it" I say "oh" and go on with my work........

I have a suggestion for those who are dissatisfied with their "digital" sounding CD player.

Take a look at a used Rega Planet (the original). This player is available used for about $400 - 500. I had similar complaints about my CD sound (especially through Klipsch), and this player is the solution. It is a very smooth, analog sounding machine. I had no idea just how different a CD player could sound until I got the Rega. I use the analog outs with silver IC's for best results on my system.

I realize that the new multi channel formats are the way many are going, but the Rega will shed a whole new light on that old 16/44.1 CD collection.

It is the pill to cure that "digital edge".

Thanks for the advice, but I would probably prefer not to convert the digital stereo CD (*) to analog in the CD player since this involves a D/A in the CD player, and a subsequent A/D in the 950 whenever the 950 does any digital signal processing (DSP) of the signal, e.g. if the 950 does DPL-II or NEO or even 5/6/7 stereo. A related problem is, as many have noted (e.g., Soundhound, Kevin C Brown, and myself), analog in's that are DSP'd in the 950 can get noisier (e.g., more hiss) than digital in's that are DSP'd in the 950.

-----------

(*) stereo CD, as opposed to DVD-A or SACD CD

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 06, 2002).]

"if you listen to cds, you are stuck with masking the harshness and abiding the lack of detail, but......WHY? ok, one more time...this 950 sounds GOOD. feed in good and hear good come through it. pitch the cds where they belong."

bossobass - you and I must have the same ears/definitly same idea of what the 950 is doing. Garbage in = garbage out.

Now I need your opinion on what SACD or DVD A player to get. The combo ones have not gotton great press (Pioneer), maybe the inexpensive Sony is the way to go. Thoughts here?

data reduction...the symptoms...become apparent...in the form of vague stereo imaging, noise modulation, a harshness to the sound, aliasing and increased background (quantising) noise. [sound on sound, ltd. 1998]
these effects become drastically more apparent after 2 or 3 generations of processing and clipping from the necessary brick wall limiting is also a problem, so soundhound, as usual, you are correct. as to whether or not it's acceptable, we disagree.
and...neither meridian nor theta, nor anyone can reverse these flaws in format.

davis s: i have had the sony dvp ns900v for about a year now and am very happy with it's performance. i'm not familiar with the latest and greatest sony players. i only know that the model i have is selling for around $500 these days. i have just started researching dvd-a players and also would like to hear input from others. i read awhile back about some fella who builds a switcher to connect both players and sells them online...anyone remember? i'll post what i find, for sure.

My front speakers can be adjusted, but my other speakers cannot. The trouble is if I adjust the fronts to sound good, by lowering some of the frequency range, then the other speakers are unadjusted, and stick out sonically like a sore thumb, in multi-channel like DPL II or DTS or Stereo 5/6/7. So I'm concluding that unless I stick to straight stereo, it's probably best to leave the front speakers un-adjusted.

Or else, adjust the front speakers when going from stereo to multi-channel formats.

It would be like my subwoofer's phase needs to be adjusted now, when going from stereo to multi-channel formats, to get the correct subwoofer phase on the 950.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 06, 2002).]

Davis S:
I don't understand why everybody is trashing the Pioneer DV-47a. I have read four magazine reviews on it, and only ONE trashed the SACD performance (another QC problem like it's rumored on the 950?).
I just bought the DV-47Ai, and it's fabulous.
The video and the DVD-A has it all over the JVC it replaces, and the SACD is MUCH better than CD, equivalent to DVD-A. Even CD is better than the top-of-the line Sony player from the late 80's it replaces.
I HIGHLY recomend it. I also hear it's lowerpriced brother (DV-45A, I think) is as good on the audio, with slightly lower video quality.

SOP- For whatever reason, everyone seems to be focussing on the (im) Perfect (Lack of) Vision review on the 47a rather than all the other reviews... I don't know why...

Kevin & SOP - you both made some enlightning comments, ala my earlier comments about a general minority of negative comments (although real) on the 950. I guess people generally focus their (I'm gulity as I read neg's on the Pioneer/and quickly dismissed it) thoughts on the bad stuff. When it comes time to buy, I will add the Pioneer to my list/and attempt to get one home for a listen.

WILL: since theta was mentioned somewhere in this thread, i'll use them as an example. theta's jitter jail technology solves jitter problems by storing the data and realigning it (reclocking). this is a very simplified explanation, but is the basic answer to your original question at the top of the thread.

what to do about harshness (also image, bass tightness, overall clarity) when playing cds.

i contend that it's the cd format moreso than the 950. you may want to try something like this as the cheapest remedy.
http://www.soundlabsgroup.com.au/lcaudio/lc_audio_lclock_x02.htm

when the site opens click on LC Audio kits, then click on L Clock X02 jitter reduction.

reclock the source and i'm sure the 950 will perform it's end of the deal quite well. this unit looks to cost around $150 USD and up to around $215 with power supply option.

thought you might be interested.

[This message has been edited by bossobass (edited October 09, 2002).]

I did notice a bit of harshness when I first got my 950, it seemed a little lacking in bass smoothness, it seems much smoother now and the bass is more subtle, of course what do I know to many years in rock and roll bands and too many miles on a Harley. I must say the Moody Blues in DTS sounded so good I almost cried.

Bossobass,


Do you think the harshness of the 950 is due to a jitter problem? Is that why the Rotel pre/pro isn't as harsh as the 950? Or maybe does the Rotel just lower the treble a tad?

Will

____________________________________________

Will: what i've tried to say (apparently not very well...sorry), is that the harshness is there in ANY prepro when playing most stereo cds.

i believe the 950 is no more harsh than the rotel....just more revealing of the cd format and the terrible production process thereof. if the 950 were harsh, then sacd and dvd-a and dd and dts would also sound harsh. if anyone hears a good multichannel sacd through their 950 and hears it as harsh, then EQ probably would help, as i think it is a room environment issue.

i hear the harshness in playing a cd through my 950, but i also have heard someone speak ever so faintly in the background of one cd that i've listened to 1,000 times before on many other setups i had over the years, that i never heard before. i'd bet money you wouldn't hear that voice through the rotel.

on the other side of that, sacd multichannel discs i have, have zero harshness through the 950...at any volume.

and...no....i don't think 'lowering the treble a tad' fixes anything.

bossobass- good post-- I agree.

Bosso:

Why do CD's have a jitter problem, but not SACD's?

_________________________________________

will: that's not what i said. in answer to your question, 'what to do about harshness', i recommended lowering jitter in the case of a cd.

all digital formats can be improved by lowering jitter, which occurs as follows:
1.) transport jitter (player's clock)
2.) interface jitter (digital interconnect)
3.) processor's transport/interface jitter rejection
4.) how well the clock is recovered and handled inside the processor.

imo, the 950 is excellent as regards #3 & #4.
this would leave mods to the player and I2s interconnect. (some say no sense in player mod without interconnect mod also (i disagree).

as i understand this, since the sacd is converted in the player, the interconnect jitter problem is gone. (someone will correct me if i'm wrong, i'm sure)

i am in line for this mod when it's available for my player:
http://www.warrengregoire.com/hifi-stereo-sony-sacd-mod.htm

or...you could buy a linn cd-12 for about $20k

the point i made about sacd vs cd is that the multichannel hi-res format is just a much better format and sounds better overall, and that translates through the 950. it can still be even better with the above mentioned mods.

here are some more interesting bits about improving digital disc sound:
1.) lighly sand (240 grit) outer and inner edges to remove the shine.
2.) blacken the sanded parts.
3.) apply auric illuminator (by audience, it comes with a blackening marker)
4. polish the cd with mikro-smooth
5. dampen the transport chassis

some say hooey, most say definitely better.

i guess my point is that it ain't the 950. the dsp chipset is truly world class. the dacs are excellent. feed it well and it will play accordingly. my opinion.

I believe that jitter is actually a very small part of why CDs don't sound as good as lps. I think it's simply that 44.1 kHz/16 bit encoding just can't do justice to the top end (high frequencies) of an analog recording.

www.jitter.de is a good place to learn about jitter. They sell a product, but the background info is good too.

DD/DTS are NOT affected by jitter because they are packeted data streams. No matter what anyone tells you.

Also,



I have heard that this stuff makes SACDs/DVD-As unplayable. (Something to do with whatever happens to the surface of the disc, and the higher freq laser used. Or something.) Maybe on audio asylum or somewhere. (I saw it referenced on HTF.)

Oh, balanced power also helps to improve jitter. Saw on Equi=tech's site somewhere that peak jitter is reduced by 2/3, and average jitter is reduced by 1/2. Don't know if this applies to typical AC filters though.

If you look on the Secret's site, under power (or line) conditioners, they also observed this. www.hometheaterhifi.com.

Jitter matters, but it's the CD format where the real problem lies...

Is anyone still making a chipset that doesn't include a PLL and buffer?

How could you recover the source clock without a PLL?

Cary

and buffer.... [not or buffer]


The point being all the DACs I've noticed announced for a while have had quite a lot, including the stuff for buffering and reclocking integrated on usually a single chip, I think. I'm not directly professionally involved with this aspect of engineering so I don't really keep up, but in any digital storage (hard drives, for instance) the 'bits' coming off the platter are in terrible shape, but its not a problem because that stuff all gets cleaned up, and it's easy to do.

Are there any modern CD players that don't do this sort of cleaning of the raw data?

Charlie,

I'm not sure what causes jitter. Maybe jitter happens after the transfer from the CD to the CD, perhaps between the player and the pre/pro via the digital connect.

I'm just guessing.

Like you, I would be curious where jitter is supposed to occur, what causes it, and how to recognize it, if it occurs. Also, I'd like to know if jitter is something that happens with CD sound, but not with DVD sound.

Thanks!

Will

[This message has been edited by Will (edited November 09, 2002).]

Regarding the CD vs. Sacd/DVD-A format wars...

When I asked Tom Nousaine about the sound quality differences between the two, he laughed. Then, a close friend of his said that he measured the frequency response of several clips from a CD...then of the same SACD(corrected for loudness variation). HE then smiled when he said that the base was "tipped up" on the SACD version. "Guess what THAT means?" he said. "It means that the producers are tweaking the Sacd stuff so that consumers will be able to tell a difference between the two formats.
Nuff said.

DTS has been doing that for years....

Charlie is absolutely right. The DTS master is made by using the 35mm magnetic film copy of the film's soundtrack. They use their 'propriatary' equalization which just basically boosts the bass. The Dolby Digital master is made on the dubbing stage, directly from the mixing console. Thus, the DTS gets the 'euphonic' colorations introduced by the magnetic film plus a boost in the low frequencies. Of course it will sound different, and 'better'!

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited November 12, 2002).]

Unfortunately, people often use this 'better' sound as proof that the DTS codec is better than Dolby Digital. DTS's higher bit rate is also touted as an indicator of higher quality; I guess it never occurs to some folks that DTS might have a higher bit rate because it's less effecient than DD.

BTW, if anyone is curious to see a comparison of DD vs DTS vs MLP on the same recording, take a look here . The graph represents the energy from the LFE track of a DVD-A.

Best,
Sanjay

And most people don't know that the DTS bit rate on DVDs is _half_ of it's normal 1.5kbits. Of course DTS won't tell you this!

Yeah, but a lot of DD DVDs are ~384 kbps too...