Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

    The difference is probably inaudible.  4x oversampling allows the
    manufacturer to use smoother-slope filters that will introduce less
    distortion, but the difference between a well-implemented 2X model
    (with digital filters) and a 4X model is likely to be seen only
    on the test bench.
    
    Given all other things the same, 4X is better, but if you have to
    pay a significant premium for it, or give up features, it's not
    worth it by itself.
    				Steve

    Gee, simple arithmetic should tell you that 4X sampling is twice
    as good as 2X sampling!  :-)
    
    --- jerry

    
    
    	But If you can't hear the difference what good is it????
    I've Listened to 2X and 4X and I can't tell. as .1 said ,
    on the bench it may be better. Certainly, if you don't have
    to pay much more for it, I'd buy one but it wouldn't be because
    it sounds better.
    
    		paul

    Thanks for the answer.
    
    Gary

    re .3
    
    You have put your finger on the Great Dilemma with respect to an
    awful lot of High End Stereo.
    
    And there are lots of possible answers:
    
    1. Because you CAN hear it
    2. Because you can CONVINCE yourself that you can hear it
    3. Because you can convince your FRIENDS that you can hear it
       (and they can't!)
    4. Because it makes you feel good to know that no further
       improvements are necessary
    5. Because you have too much money to start with
    6. ...

    re. 5
    
    That's absolutely great!  It certainly hits home as I try to decide
    which high-end macho power amp to buy myself for Christmas.  I'm
    trying to decide how much power do I really need, how much is 
    purely psychological, and how much power do I need to psyche myself
    into knowing I finally have "enough".
    
    Hmmm, is "enough" an oxymoron when related to high-end stereo?
    

    re: .5
    
    3a. Because your friends can convince you that they can hear it.
    	(But you can't!  Emperor's new clothes, and all that.)
    
    
    If you are really going for the high end, buy a CD with digital out,
    listen to the inferior A/D converters they tossed into the player for
    the masses and impress your friends with how awful it is, and then wait
    for the audiophile megabuck digital preamps to come out, and impress
    your friends with how good it is.  (Throw in a story or two about the
    old days when everyone was maggie-hacking for good effect.)
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    
    re .6
    
       I'd heard that the recommended minimum power to correctly match
    the CD medium was an amp (integrated/standalone/otherwise) that
    allowed 100 WPC. I'd previously had one that gave 32 WPC and got
    a new 100 Watter. There is a difference, if only in clarity.
    
    				The Cruiser
    
    

    Re: .7
    
    You mean D-to-A, not A-to-D (just for the record).  DAT recorders
    will (do) have both.

    
    It should be pointed out that in the world of "high end" audio you
    often are dealing with very subtle differences.  I would sugggest
    this, that if you don't have a top end system, you probably won't
    hear a lot of those differences.  You may know that you can spend
    hundreds of dollars just on speaker cable.  Now, except in a top
    flight system, you aren't going to hear the difference.
    
    When deciding whether to spend the bucks, I suggest reading this
    and the AUDIO conference to get opinions.
    
    In really good systems, this seemingly trivial enhancements do make
    a noticable improvement...
    
    Regards, Jim
    

    re -.5
    
    In the long run I think digital-out will make a great difference.
    It won't just be digital preamps but that connection to DAT and
    some sophisticated signal processing that would let you recreate
    the soundstage or "fix" some bad mixing on the master.
    
    Les

4x oversampling is supposed to make a difference in the way the machine
sounds down the road a few years.  Using 4x oversampling a 2 or 3 pole
filter can be used.

With 2x a more complex (5-6 pole?)  filter is used.  As components
(capacitors, resistors...)  get older, the the filter begins to introduce
phase shift, and other supposedly audible things...

A 10 pole filter is a very complex beast and I could believe that in the
next few years it would wander due to heat and the like.

Whether or not it will make a difference is unclear to me right now.

						Tim

    It would seem that if the signal were changing slowly (1/(2*16))
    per sample then the oversampling would not help. The output would
    have no new possible value to take and the original sample rate
    would still appear in the output to be filtered. I do not know how
    often the above would happen but would generate smaple noise near
    audio band when it happened. If simple filters were used for 2x
    or 4x systems the sound might be worse during those times. Problem
    could be solved by using 17 bit DAC for 2x and 18 bit DAC for 4x.
    There would always be a different value each sample no matter what
    the slope of the signal were (excepting zero).
    
    Les

    Last week I listened to a Meridian 207 which is a 4X oversampling
    16 bit unit.  It sounded better than anything I had heard to that
    point listening through a Mark Levinson ML7A pre amp, a pair of
    Levinson No. 20 mono power amps, and a pair of Magnaplanar MG3A's.
    I compared it to a Sonographe unit and a Mission PCM 7000.  The
    Meridian was cleaner and more accurate.  Then they switched in an
    Accuphase unit which I believe uses 2X oversampling (the $8K model).
    I don't pretend to have that kind of money for a CD player, but
    I'd recommend that anyone who questions the capabilities of the
    medium should give this setup a listen.  I believe that this will
    make believers out of most of the diehards who discount CD as
    non-musical.  And it also showed that either sampling can produce
    an excellent product with quite musical results.
    

    Re. -1
    
    This may be off the track, but where did you listen to this great
    equipment?
    
    I'd like to think it was your equipment, but more probably in a
    store?

    I wish that equipment were mine as well.  I auditioned it at The
    Sound Concept in Rochester, New York.  They carry a nice assortment
    of high end gear as well as many upper end mid-fi pieces.