Phonosophie Room-Animator and Audio-Animator

[mikehit]

I know this is a bit OT, but back to CD lathe device. I believe the logic behind it is that non-circularities in the CD shape lead to 'wobble' when it spins and this leads to a disrupted audio signal.

My question is (from a technical point of view) whether a system that is optimised for transfer of data (e.g. a computer program) is also optimised for transmission of a music signal. Note that this does not enter into the realms of what happens to the signal once the 1's and 0's have been read - I am talking only about how efficiently and correctly the 1's and 0's are picked up from the disc.

Because my thinking is that if you load the bits of a computer program in the wrong order then surely it can't work. So if a system has enough fidelity to install a complex computer program with all its interwoven routines and sub-routines, then an audio signal should present no problems. And if CDs with all their supposed faults are OK for computer programs, then they would be OK for music too.

Or does a computer program have a level of redundancy built into it so that it doesn't matter if the odd bit goes missing because it has loads of internal checks to 'fill the gaps'. And if they do,do audio recordings have the same redundancy?

And before everything gets hot under the collar, it would be interesting to know if responders are posing personal opinion or known fact from personal experience of programming etc.

 

[Effem]

The main difference between a CD transport reading a disc and a computer drive reading a disc is the audio player has to read the data in real time with just one pass of the laser, whereas a computer drive can make as many read attempts as it sees fit at high speed, using a checksum to verify the data. However, there are now CD players on the marketthat are using this samehigh speed multiple read technology.

 

[JamPal]

The Room Animator works purely according to the laws of Physics (the ordered movement of electrons in matter) and depends on the use of natural matter. It contains only naturally-occurring materials. Whenever we listen to the music from a HiFi system, we need air in our room to transmit the sound. The more evenly arranged is the “sound conductivity†of the air, the better the acoustic behaviour of the room. In practice this means: increased dynamics, high resolution, more detail and improved spatial definition, a more accurate bass rendition, and a more live feel to the musical rendition.

Wow, just seen this thread. :raoflmfao::raoflmfao::raoflmfao::raoflmfao::raoflmfao:

Found a photo of the factory, and some of the customers.

 

[Anthony]

good to see you back tones. i've missed your reviews because you do bother to try stuff out.

all opinions valid here.

 

[sq225917]

tones i don't believe for one nano second that the cd lathe works by any means other than effectively centering the centre hole of the disc.

i think it's absolutely no different to the difference between and off centre record spindle hole and one that is centred perfectly.

i don't know the electornics of the optics in the cd read mech, but i figure a more rotationally stable cd,means less effort, mechanical, electrical and computational goes into recovering the data from the disc.

we could only prove this by tracking the activity of the parts in the cd mech that compensate for out-of-spec cd's.

sure in a perfect player where every section of the cd mech circuitry gets its own power supply and regulation and has zero crosstalk between these parts, then maybe it would make no difference.

You simply can't claim 'it doesn't work', you can say their explanation is bullshit, which it is, but it works in my system for everyone who has heard it, so the fact it doesn't work for you just means that it doesn't work for your system or for your ears.

i'm sure there are many more technically minded posters who could explain why an improvement in the concentricity of a cd could make it sound better.

i'd like to hear from them.

 

[meninblack]

See here:

http://www.mscience.com/faq17.html

 

[tones]

sq225917 wrote:

tones i don't believe for one nano second that the cd lathe works by any means other than effectively centering the centre hole of the disc.i think it's absolutely no different to the difference between and off centre record spindle hole and one that is centred perfectly.

i don't know the electornics of the optics in the cd read mech, but i figure a more rotationally stable cd,means less effort, mechanical, electrical and computational goes into recovering the data from the disc.

we could only prove this by tracking the activity of the parts in the cd mech that compensate for out-of-spec cd's.

sure in a perfect player where every section of the cd mech circuitry gets its own power supply and regulation and has zero crosstalk between these parts, then maybe it would make no difference.

You simply can't claim 'it doesn't work', you can say their explanation is bullshit, which it is, but it works in my system for everyone who has heard it, so the fact it doesn't work for you just means that it doesn't work for your system or for your ears.

i'm sure there are many more technically minded posters who could explain why an improvement in the concentricity of a cd could make it sound better.

i'd like to hear from them.

But, SQ, do you not believe that when CD player manufacturers make their machines, they allow for any slight deficiencies in the centredness of the hole? Since absolute perfection in centredness is not possible,CD reading mechanisms are designed with an allowance for a slight wobble. And barring complete hashups in manufacturing, that's all that that it will ever be. All machinery of any kind has a built-in tolerance to an acceptable degree of imperfection, otherwise nothing would work properly.

But think further; if the hole is off centre, the lathe has no way of knowing that. Willthe CD then not wobble eccentrically on the lathe table andthe bevel be cut also off-centre and you would then be no better off (and perhaps even rather worse off)? You really could be through to the aluminium!

And even assuming that the bevel was cut uniformly all the way round, do you not then have the same situation? As the same amount of material has been removed uniformly from the edge all the way round, you're left with almost exactly the same situation as you had before. You have lost some matter from the edge, thus reducing slightly the weight at the edge and therefore the centrifugal force in the edge when it spins, but this is so tiny compared with the bulk of the CD that it will make no difference.

So, I say again, it does not work because it cannot work. I believe you have heard what you want to hear. But if you're happy with the results, that's all that matters. I'm certainly happy with mine!

 

[sq225917]

tones, i do believe that they build in for the discrepency that exist in manufacturing, what i don't believe is that there are no knock on effects of the methods they use.

when i refered to the centredness of the disc i didn't mean with reference to the data tracks, i meant with respect to the none-round, unbalanced, outside rotating edge of the disc

let's look at the methods they use.

a tracking mechnaism that allows the laser to move relative to the rest of the cd mech. under electric and electronic control. a floating vibrating head that draws electricity and creates it own vibration that 'must' effect nearby components. or do you beleive this mechanism works in perfect electrical and mechanical isolation.

a spung loaded subchasis, with it's own resonance that needs to be damped and compensated for electrically in the read head once more.

an error correction algorithm that fills in the gaps when the cd can't read a data pit, either due to bad cd, or as we are interested in, an inability to read a specific pit due to a transient fluctuation in the read head control mechanism. ie loss of tracking due to vibration or electrical inteference.

if cd was perfect we wouldn't need reed-solomon, but it's a real time read, with only one bite at the cherry so it needs help.even reed solomon isn't perfect, if it was then applications like exact audio codec and read unti right software wouldn't have been developed.

I believe that the cd lathe produces a cd where the remaining mass is more in balance when spun, and as such gives all the error correction mechnisms an easier time of things. with less demands being placed on cd mech we get a more accurate representation of what is on the disc. and i beleive it this reduced reliance on correction mechanisms that is resolved as 'better' sound from lathed cd's.

this is backed up by tests i have done using a lathed and unlathed copy of the same disc. EAC audio codec extracts all the data on the cd with less repeat passes and reduced extraction time on the lathed disc than on the original. so either the discs vary in production or the lathed disc does something that makes the cd mechs job easier and reduces the number of passes required until it is satisifed it has the exact data that is on the disc.

if EAC which 'reads until right', requires less time to read a lathed cd, then it follows that the reason for this is that is senses less errors, it is these same read errors that are corrected by anciliary means in a cd mech and i beleive there is an audible cost to these mechanism.

You still have brought nothing to the table to prove otherwise apart from your ears, and i'm not interested in your 'opinion', i'm interested in a real discussion of the possibilities of how and why the cd lathe makes an audible change in the sound recovered from some cd's.

i'd be really interested to hear from anyone who can explain the function of reed solomon and if it actually generates a perfect replacement sample (ie the lost data not an approximation), with no effect on data rate timing, (jitter) and no downstream effects for DAC.

 

[tones]

sq225917 wrote:

tones, i do beleive that they build in for the discrepency that exist in manufacturing, what i don't believe is that there are no knock on effects of the methods they use.when i refering to the centredness of the disc i didn't mean with reference to the data tracks, though i'll tackle that also,i meant with respect to the none round, unbalanced, outside rotating edge of the disc

There is no reason why the disc shouldn't be balanced. The acrylic coating is applied and the discs spun rapidly so that centrifugal force coats the disc completely. This will ensure evenness.if cd was perfect we wouldn't need reed-solomon, but it's a real time read, with only one bite at the cherry so it needs help.even red solomon isn't perfect, if it was then application like exact audio codec and read unti right software wouldn't have been developed.

Here you've reached the limits of my knowledge, but I think this is wrong. Reed-Solomon refers to the encoding of the data on the disc. AFAIK, it has nothing whatsoeverto do with the ability or optherwise to read a CD.I believe that the cd lathe produces a cd where the remaining mass is more in balance when spun, and as such gives all the error correction mechnisms an easier time of things. with less demands being placed on cd mech we get a more accurate representation of what is on the disc.

I accept that you think that, but Ibelieve that the built-in tolerances, plus the fact that the hardware (CDs) are generally all well within them will ensure that some sliver of material cut from a CD will have precisely zero effect on how a CD is read. Plus, consider what the lathing allegedly does. It is supposed to improve all sorts of sound qualities. I can't for the life of me remember what they are, but let's say, for the sake of argument, that it allegedly improves bass. How? Does the new, steadier CD suddenly find it easier to identify the pits marked "bass", hence the improvement? But of course the CD isn't encoded this way. You read a pit or you don't. It defies the imagination (well, mine anyway) that a minor change in rotational stability (which I don't believe exists anyway) will change the character of the sound. It may cause a minor improvement in pit reading, but nothing of any significance. And I understand from folk who know much more about these things than I (i.e., most people) that the error correction systems are so good that nothing is lost.this is backed up by tests i have done using a lathed and unlathed copy of the same disc. EAC audio codec extracts all the data on the cd with less repeat passes and reduced extraction time on the lathed disc than on the original. so either the discs vary in production or the lathed disc does something that makes the cd mechs job easier and reduces the number of passes required until it is satisifed it has the exact data that is on the disc stored in memory.

if EAC which reads until right, requires less time to read a lathed cd, then it follows that the reason for this is that is senses less errors.

There you're 'way beyond me, but I stand by my original opinion - it doesn't work because there's nothing to work. So I guess we just beg to differe and enjoy our respective versions of audio paradise.

 

[sq225917]

reed solomon is used to encode the data on the disc and also to fill in read errors on recovery.

it's good, but it ain't perfect...

With regard to someone saying it made the bass sound better, could it not just be that the bass is where their auditory focus lies, in reality it's just sparkled up everything a little, but that is all they notice.