Re: Audio quality of CDR, any theory ????

Article View: rec.audio.tech

Article #1068

#1068

From: Lee HC
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:00

36 lines
2698 bytes


Arny Kr�ger <arnyk@flash.net> wrote in article
<o8jg2.640$ok1.1540@news.flash.net>...
> 
> If you define "good" as "free of audible distortion and noise", then this
> would have to be true, right?
> 
> 
> >2. How to ensure an "ideal" CD players performed ideally in domestic
setting.
> Then, who need "ideal" CD players?
> 
> Nobody. All we need is CD players that are free of audible distortion and
> noise. They already exist and have existed for well over a decade.


Arny,

Just a few interesting points to discuss :
1. How do you define & measure "audible distortion" ?
2. When you mention "free of audible distortion and noise", do you mean 0%
distortion & noise ?
3. When you mention "good" CD players sound the "same", how many "% of
identical" are you talking ?

Frankly, as a tube lover, my definition of "good" seemingly have not much
co-relationship with "distortion".
At least, I can't build a HiFi room of "ideal" acoustic.
Distortion is "inevitable" in my non-ideal domestic setting.
So, I don't use the term "distortion" to measure my system.
For me, "good" is close to my "personal believe" based on my "personal
experience" of live performance & domestic HiFi audition. So, "good" is
simply "good" to me & may not be "good" to other.

Lee HC

Technical Details

Message-ID: <01be2f32$c2fec7a0$LocalHost@default>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References:

<753ar1$p8u$1@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk><F308098DC0C8DC2F.31FD14AE39298D33.674812088DCBAA2A@library-proxy.airnews.net><d6UPeXAfMmd2EwoM@heading.demon.co.uk><1C5AE5CA0F2F9ADC.A0C451A2A5364D00.E599AFEBD487605B@library-proxy.airnews.net><F45znB.9Bw@world.std.com><9AC33C397E6F7EEC.EB514CB227F8BAFB.F49C9B9A4FBF795C@library-proxy.airnews.net><z1ef2.322$S7.782@news.flash.net> <01be2daf$fced7620$LocalHost@default> <s+C3BBAV7Ag2EwGz@jmwa.demon.co.uk> <01be2e67$86956740$LocalHost@default> <o8jg2.640$ok1.1540@news.flash.net>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 109f11,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid109f11,public
X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,public
X-Google-Thread: f6728,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gidf6728,public
X-Google-Thread: 10ff83,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid10ff83,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d85e,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d85e,public
X-Google-Thread: 105a81,48d41a4dac9741b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid105a81,public
From: "Lee HC" <leehc@glink.net.hk>
Subject: Re: Audio quality of CDR, any theory ????
Date: 1998/12/24
Message-ID: <01be2f32$c2fec7a0$LocalHost@default>
X-Deja-AN: 425481137
References: <753ar1$p8u$1@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk><F308098DC0C8DC2F.31FD14AE39298D33.674812088DCBAA2A@library-proxy.airnews.net><d6UPeXAfMmd2EwoM@heading.demon.co.uk><1C5AE5CA0F2F9ADC.A0C451A2A5364D00.E599AFEBD487605B@library-proxy.airnews.net><F45znB.9Bw@world.std.com><9AC33C397E6F7EEC.EB514CB227F8BAFB.F49C9B9A4FBF795C@library-proxy.airnews.net><z1ef2.322$S7.782@news.flash.net> <01be2daf$fced7620$LocalHost@default> <s+C3BBAV7Ag2EwGz@jmwa.demon.co.uk> <01be2e67$86956740$LocalHost@default> <o8jg2.640$ok1.1540@news.flash.net>
Organization: Global Link Information Services Ltd.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.misc,hk.rec.audio-visual,uk.rec.audio,tw.bbs.rec.audiophile

Reply to Parent Message