Ken Kessler Retired

The aforementioned Sonys have analogue output which press right up against the theoretical limit of what the CD format is capable of. This is demonstrably and measurably the case!

Of course there are many who prefer the sound of vinyl, but given that in pretty much every measurable engineering sense CD is technically better than analogue master tape, let alone a vinyl record, that's got nothing to do with 'accuracy' either!

All that's better about a Wadia than a Sony is build quality too - it's got nothing to do with engineered performance, though obviously people will hear what they want to hear and believe what they want to believe.

 

I haven't heard this £300 Sony which is as good as a Wadia, apart from in build, though I find it quite difficult to believe!
Still, having heard a few Wadias I bought an Advantage

But despite all this, my Casio watch keeps time to within a second a week, as well as telling me air pressure, temperature and altitude. And I'd much prefer it to a piece of over-priced bling like this, even though it's on special at £6045!

 

Oh! and on the subject, I found Ken Kessler to be a good, straight and friendly guy in all my dealings back in the 90's. BUT you have to remember your dealing with a Yank!! they take themselves soooooo seriously.

I think the main problem with reviewers is industry politics, and the PR men don't help. People have agendas and long memories.

Richard

 

Your statement regarding £300 versus £5000 is a bit off the mark, there have been plenty of measurements in magazines showing differences in measurement of CD players, I would say the Wadia is much more acurate and has better measurement than the Sony.

Not all CD players and transports measure and sound the same, even in the same price brackets, though for some reason I have seen quite accurate speed from some cheaper transports even though they do not sound as good as more expensive machines with poorer speed accuracy?

 

Really? Which measurements impress you the most? I ask because any half decent player will have a flat frequency response with very low THD+N and low noise modulation.

Measurements of "jitter" performance can provide some spectacular graphics which are irrelevant. These provide ample fodder for people without any technical knowledge, but with vivid imaginations, who get the wrong end of the stick and jump to conclusions along the lines of "there are measured differences which must be audible".

Wadia have some silly ideas about reconstruction filters, which result in their players rolling off wthin the audible range. Wadia players are certainly NOT more "accurate" than anything made by sony, and they measure worse.

If you find a "high-end" machine that sounds different to a $300 Sony or Denon then (from an engineering perspective) it is the highend machine that will have the poorer measurements.

 

It's more like "there are audible differences, which must be measurable somehow, perhaps these measurements we'd previously assumed were irrelevant (jitter) have more relevance than we'd thought?"

Dunc

 

Are you saying that jitter performance doesn't matter? I have heard some very marked differences between two CD transports (Cambridge Audio DiscMagic and a Chord Blu), so what might they be caused by?

 

If there are audible differences, then they show up in the frequency response plot (eg. Wadia). Manufacturers have to be really incompetent (eg. tube output stage, NOS) to have significant (and audible) THD+N.

 

It's not audible.

Explanations in the most likely order of significance:

#1 The badge (being able to see the player)
#2 Level's not closely matched
#3 Left/Right tracking error (ie levels not "balanced")
#4 Frequency response bent
#5 THD+N (tube/NOS bollocks)

 

Well this was just the CD transport, the differences were the same with two different DACs as well.

The thing I found was different was that while the Chord had more detail and better imaging, heavy music like metal could not be played as loud without being harsh and hurting my ears.

It was not frequency response because I played with EQ to try and fix the problem with no luck at all.

I don't think it was the badge because the £70 Cambridge audio sounded better to me.

Not the levels because it was the max level I could listen at which was different between the two.

Not left/right balance as it was just changing from the digital player.

So... I wonder what it could be if it wasn't jitter.

 

Poor impedance matching between the Chord transport and DAC, correct matching with the Cambridge?

Just an idea if jitter isn't the reason.

 

Should the impedance matter as long as the ones and zeros get though in a recognisable state?

 

That's the whole point - perhaps they were not all getting through in a recognisable state

We need a digital guru to come tell us.

 

We have Oedipus, to name only one.

 

Isn't he ((KK)the "Ron Manager" of hi-fi journalism. I particularly like his BWFH comments, and agree with him that interconnects are 'totally' (but there are no absolutes in hi-fi) system dependent.

 

That's no guarantee it wasn't the badge . If this kind of thing only arose from obvious conscious preconceptions ("the more expensive one must be better"), it would be easy to control for when it's necessary to do so - and it isn't easy at all...

 

i know ken for many a years, i agreed with him sometimes not, to me he was an icom "like it or not" the industry needs that kind of criticism, i was the only retailer to arrange and have a debate live on radio "L.B.C." back in 1995 when i had a shop opposite the radio station, with simon bates, ken, and richer sounds, it brought an amazing response to the audience who listen to that debate that they wanted to make it a serial, both L.B.C. and i lost our positions, i still have that tape of the broadcast, what ever people say about him he was an entertaining writer, not always correct but willing to listen,..nando

 

Hmm.. it just occurred to me, that I tried upsampling on the Chord to 96KHz and it sounded just the same. If it was an impedance issue it would be different at a higher frequency wouldn’t it?

Both players were using AES/EBU on XLR outputs and the same cable.

Peter, I don't think it was me imagining it, as I would never have thought that would be the result. I might have thought one sounded better or worse but surely not that the Chord physically made my ears say it was too loud before the Cambridge did. I don't think I imagined physical discomfort.

My hunch would be that the switch mode PSU was not giving a particularly clean line and therefore causing jitter which made the high frequencies distort.

Rather than me guessing though, lets put this another way. What are the things a transport must do to provide as accurate a digital signal as possible?

 

HFN will be even less interesting now that KK has jumped ship, its sad....HFN and HFC are now looking and reading alike.....thank god we have HiFi Plus (when RG isnt posing or the endless boring speaker reviews) and HifiWorld.

 

KK is an entertaining writer because tends to be in permanent OTT mode, but he isn't very helpful if you are looking for advice and opinions to help choose a piece of equipment, where balanced, well reasoned discussion is more helpful.