 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
12.64.18.148
Both Kalman Rubinson (Stereophile January 2005) and Wes Phillips (On Hi Fi October 1, 2004) give the McCormack Audio UDP-1 Universal Player very favorable reviews. Phillips said: “ What I didn’t expect was immediacy, incisiveness, and impact that were as finely nuanced as those of any digital player I’ve heard this side of the $20,000 Linn Sondek CD12”However, John Atkinson’s measurements of this player in Stereophile January 2005 reflect very poorly on this player. For example, the 1 kHz waveform bears little resemblance to a sine wave. Linearity and jitter rejection are also very poor. Given his measurements, Atkinson admits that he can’t explain why “…. Kal liked the UDP-1’s sound so much.” It would be less puzzling if the reviewers indicated mediocre sound.
How bad must a player measure before we notice?
Follow Ups:
at least for me..I stopped reading most spec figures in amps, cd players etc..what counts for me is how my ears will perceive the sound in the end.AP
Hopefully, after burn-in, the source I currently have will come close.The UDP-1s' Achilles Heel is the less than stellar (and non-DVI) video performance.
"How bad must a player measure before we notice?"
I have observed this phenemenon before with a Perpetual Technologies DAC and Processor. The DAC was fine on it's own, but when the processor was added all I got was very high noise. From what I understand John Atkinson found the measurements of the DAC alone to be very good, but with the processor they were very bad. The critics at Stereophile found the combination to sound wonderful, and I found it to be excessively noisey with poor dynamic range.
I really think your question should be: "How qualified are the subjective critics who write for these magazines?" My answer is; very few are and most aren't.
Given the measurement techniques in use today, it is fair to say that if something measures well it is at least mediocre but could be very good. If it measures poorly it really is pretty bad.
The Ever Evil Doctor Steel
Very interesting, mine should be here any day. (!) Kal, say it ain't so. Plus, do measurements matter?
My experience in 50 years of listening to stereo equipment, 15 years as a recording engineer and a degree in electrical engineering has convinced me that electrical measurements tell us almost nothing of how a piece of equipment will sound. Measurements are more of a tool in the design process then they are in evaluating equipment. Can't wait for the comments on this
finding the measurements of two components to be different, could, quite possibly, be indicative of the fact that the two might sound different. This I think is true all the way down to measuring the capacitance on two different pieces of wire.
I think you are correct. But the problem is making a connection between the measurement and the subjective sound of the component. For instance if amplifier A has lower harmonic distortion then amplifier B is there a sonic signature we can equate to that measurement. In my experience there isn't. I think the problem is that maybe we are measuring the wrong things. There could be some key measurements that do equate to sonic performance that we just havn't figured out yet.
Alan
Maybe the question you should be asking is what are we missing with the measurement techniques that are presently being used? It's what I have continually asked myself over the years.
The Ever Evil Doctor Steel
I think what we are missing is the dynamic transient nature of music coupled with how we hear versus elctronic measurements which are basically steady state. We then take these steady state measurements and try to extrapolate transient performance. It just doesn't seem to work. I have heard a lot of gear that measures poorly yet sounds quite wonderful to me. All solid state gear measures far superior to tube equipment yet I prefer the sound of tube gear over solid state. SACD's measure far superior to LP's but I prefer LP's. You can claim that reviewers as well as I don't know what we're talking about but I can just as easily claim that the objectivists have no real evidence that measurements can predict the sound of an audio component.
Alan
By the way Happy New Year to all
"I think what we are missing is the dynamic transient nature of music coupled with how we hear versus elctronic measurements which are basically steady state. "
I would recommend that you take a long look at loudspeaker performance in this area. They have tendency to make some of the most mediocre amps look great.
The Ever Evil Doctor Steel
Yes, but how come that we can nevertheless distinguish barely measurable differences with electronics when heard through sound transducers with their much poorer transient responses?An UDP-1 novice
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
