The Yumcha Diaries 飲茶後記: 26-06-10 and 03-07-10

The Yumcha Diaries 飲茶後記: 26-06-10 and 03-07-10

03-07-10 鄔 Sir Sir 地認識了一些老發燒友
一次的機緣，讓我認識了幾位老一輩的發燒友。覺得他們挺有趣的，就此記下。

事情是這樣開始的。沒多久以前， 飲茶前在 Pro Sound 唱片店無意聽到一位先生跟朱老闆在聊天中提及聞名已久的盧華煇 (ML)。 知道此人是發燒友後， 就跟他搭訕， 聊了起來。原來此人就是也聽説過的 "鄔 Sir Sir"。鄔 Sir Sir 性隨和（爲了方便朋友，也就這樣自稱)，大家言談甚歡， 就約了改天去盧先生那裏拜訪。

就在王羽佳的音樂會上又踫到了朱 老闆和 鄔 Sir Sir 等一票人。音樂會完了就跟了他們去宵夜。坐上還有另外兩位：一位 DIY 先生，也就是朱先生 Pro Sound 店裏那部聲音不錯的 DIY 12E1 膽後級的製造者；另一位是古典發燒友。這幫人都是注重聼現場古典音樂的人，在發燒友中少見，大家遂聊得很開心。

房術
言歸正傳，是日飲茶後就隨 "鄔 Sir Sir"上了盧先生的場。用“場”一字，再貼切不過，因爲屋子裏藏了不少玄機。 其中之巧妙，盧先生也在開場前一一為我們詳細介紹。先說主聆聽空間， 原來是間六面與外隔絕的“屋中屋”，有地台墊高的“房内房”， 比起大多錄音室的隔音處理有過之而無不及。所有的電都經過大排大排的 Isoclean 處理。房内的木板很多都有弧度的，有調聲之用。相對來講，頂尖的器材好像變了配角似的：

Vinyl - Clearaudio Statement-Goldfinger
Digital Transport- Metronome Kalista Reference SE on stands
DAC - Wadia 931 Controller + 922 monoblock DAC
Phonopreamp - FM Acoustics 222 MkII
Preamp - Audio Note M10
Amp - Edge NL Reference monoblocks
Speakers - JM Lab Grand Utopia EM

耳鳴
此房隔音之佳，我想一時無倆。同行 whlee 說一進屋就耳鳴， 令我想起當年去鄉下 Delaware 探望我二姐時，那令人難眠， 寂靜如雷轟的夜之聲。器材放在不起眼的地方，面對著的只有喇叭和放大器，感覺很舒暢。此刻想起二姐那標緻無雙的瓜子臉孔， 卻只能緬懷...

聲音也好。就算我這號角喇叭和單端三極管愛好者和盧先生口味可能南轅北轍， 也能盡情欣賞他的一些首本戲。如果你去拜訪，請聼聼以下的幾首黑膠：

-Direct-to-disc 日本妹鋼琴，彈得一般， 但音效一流。
-Manger 靚聲王 LP 第三首的鋼琴，第二的詭魅之聲。

如果你聼過後，覺得你播這些比盧先生播的好的話，就請你在網上發表， 邀請我們去聼聼， 以證其實。

話又說回來， 在背景寧靜和細節重播上，Clearaudio Statement 肯定是優秀的，可是我認爲這個唱盤似乎有點遺漏了音樂重生最重要之一的一環， 那就是節奏感。 這是我聼過 Statement , 甚至於 Master Reference (乃至於大部份 Clearaudio 唱盘) 後都沒能揮去的感覺。如果你擁有或聼過這些唱盤， 不同意的話，不妨說說你的觀點。盧先生自覺得正在升級的 Continuum 在小品的重播是比 Statement 更生動的， 但大爆棚就以後者爲優。 我期待短期内能聽到盧先生頂級的 Continuum。

在這裏我沒用"前輩"或者"師傅"這些人人掛在嘴上可沒放在心裏的表面之詞。這些年， 見過太多庸俗不堪的 "前輩"， 以老賣老的老不朽。 盧先生令我耳目一新。 他有他的觀念，可他沒有説教， 平和， 可嘉。鄔 Sir Sir 那天說， 音響對一些人來說，像宗教一樣黑白，一笑。

26-06-10 A Challenge to digital amps
The day was stormy, but that did not prevent us from squeezing in a "challenge" between yumcha and the HKPO-Wang Yuja concert. The resident system was simple and digital (Tact and Lyngdorf). We brought over a very cheap system: Counterpoint 3.1 tube preamp and Adcom 555 MkII amp. I shall be brief. To most of us, the cheaper conventional system scores over the digital amps in most aspects, particularly in bass and dynamics.

The Yumcha Diaries: 15/08/09

The Yumcha Diaries: 15/08/09
Triple Play

It was really nice in the last few yumchas to see quite a few old friends turning up. Sometimes we even have more unregistered people than people who have signed up. Some are regulars who prefer not to be mentioned, some just walk-in's.

It should be stated here: (1) the yumcha has been maintained jointly by a few of us, because the open spirit of JC yumcha, rooted in Review33, deserves to live on even if the founder has left HK; (2) everyone is welcome, even if we have not met you. I know very few people would just turn up, but some have in the past after an email or PM; (3) if it's politically incorrect for you to come yumcha with us, that's too bad; we'd still like to see you and would not mention you at all should you come (one of the reasons for some unregistered attendees).

BenYC's setup: Two Saturdays ago four of us re-visited the setup (click for previous report). A real tweaker himself, BenYC has straightened out the inadvertent tweak of his son, and the sound took a dramtic turn for the better. I'd like the massed strings to be a bit fuller, but everything else was very nice. The C/P ratio is among the higest I have ever heard. BenYC has just changed the crossover and I look forward to his further efforts.

This past Saturday: It was a nice surprise, with 9 people altogether. Topics ranged from DACs to the relationship between cooking and lung cancer. I even got to look at some X-rays! No fees, but that should be the case as it's not my expertise! As we enter the age when more and more relatives and family members become ill, it's as important to build up mental fortitude as it's to find ways to soothe our minds, and nothing does that better than music. Not hifi, music!

Sang's setup: After yumcha, most of us went in 2 cars for a rare visit to Yuen Long. First stop was Sang's place. This is my 3rd visit (click for report of 1st visit and 2nd visit) and not much has changed. As I have just loaded quite a bit of music onto whlee's iPod, I am lending him my Wadia iTransport. Being 惡客, we plugged this into the SFD-2. Comparison with the resident transport (Acuustic Arts CDP) was interesting to say the least, even sobering. While perhaps not as steady as the Acuustic Arts, the iPod seemed to deliever not only a better perpective, but has more details and better rhythm and pace. Just before we ;eft, we changed the power cord of his DAC and things took a dramatic turn for the better. We did not have time for a re-match.

Andy's setup: Then we went to Fairview Garden. Thanks Andy for entertaining us on short notice. Since my last visit Andy has acquired a Benchmark Pre DAC and also set up his portable PC to play music WAV files (EAC-burned) via USB connection (with Opticis optical cable in between). Using the same files and the same DAC, the comparison between iPod/iTranposrt and PC/USB was fascinating, to say the least. Both sounded very good, though the PC was cleaner. However, all of us preferred the iPod/iTransport for dynamics, rhythm and pace as well as, surprisingly, details! This is in agreement with my view last time in a similar shootout held at Danz's place. There is something seriously lacking in PC playback, expression.

All of this Music Server stuff shall be further treated in detail in another article. Let me say here I have also acquired a Squeezebox Classic and shall also report on it.

Surprise TAD/Shindo visit: Lastly we managed to squeeze another visit before dinner by visiting yet another TAD setup! I shall report in detail in a later article. Let me just say that it's hard to believe a Shindo tube setup of 8 watts per channel can adequately drive TAD 2402, but this fellow against all odds finally did it. Secret? Shindo must be connected in balanced mode. Sound was excellent and 敲擊卡門 was beautifully done! Bravo!

A very full day. Origianlly we were to audition my SB3 but that shall have to wait till next time.

MUSIC SERVER DIARY: (3) Apple Lossless vs Wave 44,1 vs Wave 48

MUSIC SERVER DIARY: (3) Apple Lossless vs WAV 44,1 vs WAV 48

Part 3
iPod/Wadia iTransport
First Impressions in my home:
My test at home prior to the trial at Danz's place was actually not in one session. I burned some files and listened and then prepared different files again. But for convenience I am writing this up as if it happened in one session.

Preparation of Files using iTunes
I had burnt a lot of CDs into iTunes. I used Apple Lossless to burn and store, but for testing purpose the WAV files were mostly converted from Apple Lossless. The reason for this is that if WAV is directly used somehow album artwork cannot be imported. Bad apple! Since Sampling Rate can be customised for WAV files, for testing purpose I prepared both 44.1 and 48kHz for many tracks. These were all automatically synced onto the iPod via a USB cable.

FILES used:
For the following CDs I have prepared files of Apple Lossless, Wav(44.1) and Wav(48):

1. Shostakovich Symphony #5/Haitink, Track II. Allegretto
2. 陳果 有空來坐坐
3. Brubeck Time Out, Track 3: Take Five
4. Serenata, Track 1: Nightingale
5. Manger Test CD, Tracks 1, 5, 7, 9, 10 (no Wav44)
6. Britten Noye's Fluddle, Track 5



Test Equipment:
I used basically the equipment I used for the Yamaha NS-1000 (click for details):

-SONY CDP-R1/DAS-R1 (accepts 44.1 and 48 kHz)
-Counterpoint 2000E preamp (XLR out)
-Bryston 4B old version
-Yamaha NS-1000
- Cables (Sony Twin link; XLO 4.1 for iTransport; Gotham GAC-4 XLR and 50040)

LISTENING TEST
All tracks are compared with CD replay. The following conclusions are reached:

1. Through the iPod/iTransport, none of the formats was able to beat CD playback (in a comprehensive way). CD playback is just more dynamically accurate on both macro- and micro- levels, yielding a more nuanced performance, with more tonal shadings and harmonic integrity.

2. The Apple "Lossless" format is definitely LOSSY. Although it still sounds quite decent, compared to CD playback and WAV formats, it alters the tonal balance and dynamics in subtle and not-so-subtle ways, in ways I don't think any serious audiophile can accept. With small scaled music, this detriment may not be so easily noticeable, but on orchestral climaxes the "dropout" is audible. The other interesting thing is that Apple Lossless sounds subjectively louder, which is almost surely an indication of compression.

3. WAV files in either 44.1 or 48 kHz, are significantly truer copies of the CD. However, the difference between the 2 sampling rates is of surprisingly magnitude. The higher sampling rate of 48kHz is superior: it firms out the instumental outlines, imparts a little more harmonics and, most importantly, better dynamic shadings to bring it remarkably close to CD playback. This is evident across the board. In the Shostakovich, the bass line is more threatening and climax cleaner; in Tave Five, the drum solo became more finely shaded and varied, a sure sign for better playback. With WAV at 48 kHz, the sound is really quite close to CD playback. This (re)up-sampling is ceratinly another can of worm.

CONCLUSIONS for this session
1. Although for the moment I may still continue to use iTunes to create WAV files, for sonically superior CDs, I know I shall never use Apple Lossless again, as conversion to WAV files is superior.

2. As all my DACs support 48 kHz, as long as I am using iTunes for ripping, for good sounding CDs I shall be preparing Wav files of 48 kHz for personal use.

3. Most importantly, I am satisfied by the quality of replay offered by iPod/iTransport, especially as an adjunct and not a main source. For good sound, (WAV 48 kHz) is close enough and the one I shall use. I'd like to mention that much of what I rip are sonically compromised mono "historic recordings", some dating back almost a century ago, and I think I can use lossy formats for them to save disc space. Some of these I have converted to custom AAC (at highest allowable MONO rate). Perhaps one day I shall run a comparison between the better lossy methods and seriously test even iTransport's analogue out for these files.

Questions and Coming Tests
1. Part 4 would be the next session, which had already taken place at Danz' place: comparing iPod/iTransport files with WAV 44.1 files ripped by EAC and played directly from hard-disc via USB out.

2. A big question: would ripping directly using other possibly superior methods, like using EAC or creating FLAC files, be significantly better than (conversion by) iTunes? I have already downloaded and started to use EAC (but not Foobar). I shall be comparing WAV 44.1 files ripped by EAC (which cannot do 48 kHz) with both WAV 44.1 and 48 files converted from iTunes.

3. Another big question: Would the use of an anti-jitter device improve further the digital out of the iTransport? To this end, when I have time, I shall insert such a device in the chain. I have the Genesis Digital lens, Monarchy DIP and Audio Alchemy DTI Pro32 on hand for testing.

MUSIC SERVER DIARY: (1) Background (2) iTunes/ iPod

MUSIC SERVER DIARY: (1) Background (2) First Impressions of iPod/Wadia iTransport

This is the start of likely a long series on digital playback other than conventional playback by CD or DVD/SACD/Multi players, focusing on hard disc playback, including iPod. As some of this has appeared in R33 before, I am putting Part 2 before Part 1 (scroll down). Read accordingly.

Part 2:
One thing is for sure, when I surf the net there is a mighty amount of info on technical matters, but relatively little useful material (to me) on actual use examined in detail from a balanced music/hifi viewpoint that I deem trustworthy. Much of the writing seemed to me quite biased and not rigorously tested. Hyperboles by young mavericks and outrageous predictions are everywhere. Recently, that has started to change, as major music magazines start to seriously examine this area (best is HiFi News IMHO, followed by Stereophile and TAS).

In recent years, I have encountered quite a bit of Music Servers. As someone who has a special interest in CD playback of all sorts (by equipment spanning decades), and as a person who still think "archaic" technology, like NO-oversampling and 14/16 bit chips, still have a place in the modern pantheon, I have naturally been curious. I keep an open mind. What I have heard of Music Servers ranged from pretty bad to pretty good, and it's time to investigate as more and more CDs become harder to get. Very few older people like me actually bother with digital files, and I hope I can look at this from a somewhat different angle.

Ripping Files/Interface/iTunes
The very first thing I did was to use iTunes to rip some files, just because it was already installed in my computer. I find ripping files painless and the interface pretty intuitive, good for a starter. Mind you, I started doing this BEFORE I even have an iPod or know what to do with my files. I simply said to myself there's no point anymore in making CD-Rs.

As a preview, let me say I have already downloaded and started to use EAC. I shall compare it to iTunes, but that's for later...

Apple Lossless
As I am not really interested in compressed files, I first ripped my files using Apple Lossless (I know, more later). Using this, there is nothing that you have to set. I registered my e-credit card with the iTunes store and to my dismay found that for the rather esoteric classical CDs that I rip failure to locate cover art is the norm rather than the exception! Hey, sorry, I don't rip Oasis, Radiohead (though I like them and they may or may not be fahsionable anymore) or, for that matter, Bob Dylan or Lou Reed or Madonna (I like them too). That said, I found importing artwork easy, even for those esoteric Japanese CDs, especially if you have the CD on hand and import the catalogue number. The other good thing about this is you can convert to WAV easily, but there's the nagging doubt of whether conversion is as good as ripping using WAV in the first place.

iTunes/iPod
Many people do not know one can load music onto the iPod in a lossless fashion, be it apple or WAV. Well, with the help of whlee, I was able to borrow a blank 30 GB iPod video from whlee's wife. I don't know how much time he used in clearing the contents, and much thanks here. Wow, the syncing was great! Through the, uhhhh, USB I instantly (over-) filled his iPod with what's on my iTunes. However, it's kinda dictatorial. It's not easy to be selective, kinda all or none. And it seems importing what's on the iPod but not on iTunes to iTunes is impossible without downloading some software (cheap but you have to pay).

Digital Out/iPod/Waidia iTransport
With the help of sokps, I acquired an iTransport. I was/am probably the only owner who does not have an ipod yet!!!!! The reason I am interested in this is because of its UNIQUE (so far) S/PDIF digital out. If not for an agreement with Apple, Wadia would not be selling this thing for the reasonable price. I know, in loading the file onto the iPod via USB, the signal is still most likely compromised, but that's likely no different from feeding the USB signal into newer, and not necessarily better USB-equipped DAC, like Benchmark or Bel Canto or whatever. Let's leave that out for the moment. Suffice to say, I can now use the digital out with any of my DACs, and that should be fun, and it surely did turn out to be so!

iTunes Import settings/Apple vs Wav/44.1 vs 48kHz
I said to myself, now I should compare the so-called Apple "lossless"with WAV. With the iTunes, I could easily rip with WAV. However, doing this directly frustrated me as it was not possible to import artwork, and that is a feature I'd like to keep! Sneaky! So I settled for CONVERSION to WAV files from Apple Lossless. Mind you, there's a way to get around this. You just add any short Apple Lossless file within the album and import the relevant artwork, which shall show for the whole album. Incidentally, I only keep artwork for the first track of an album, to save space.

With WAV files, I noticed you can choose settings. I decided to compare the sampling rates of 44.1 (CD) and 48kHz. Many people have said long ago that 48 sounds better under the right circumstances, and in the old days you can convert 44.1 to 48 through a DAT or professioanl CD-R(W) machine. Now, I am not really a "die-hard" fan of re(over)-sampling, but I do believe there are instances (few as it may be) where it can shine, and it's all in the implementation. Let's not be dogmatic about this. Can the very minimal difference between 44.1 and 48 make a difference? I included some audiophile tracks. I have conducted brief tests using the Wadia iTransport, and I have to say the results are very promising indeed. Read on...

Part 1 （Updated from what was posted December 4, 2008 in R33)

BACKGROUND
1. As a 老餅 who has ＞20,000 LPs/CDs and who likes the physical act of browsing at cover art and reading liner notes, I am absolutely sure I shall keep my CDs till the end of time and never rip the majority of my software onto a music server (impossible and self-defeating task). Of course, it can be fun to rip some "audiophile" tracks just for testing convenience.

2. Neither would I find downloading music (especially paying ones) very useful in general. The classical music sector is notorious for not keeping what can be argued as the MAJORITY of old recorded performances in print. This is not something well understood by pop listeners who likes to download a "song" or two (funny a symphony is just a "song" in lesser downloading language). Paying for music recorded with older technologies but have been "re/up/sampled" I'd not bother with (and that covers almost all of the greatest performers), but I shall keep an open mind on music that had been recorded in high-bit formats originally, like those from recent true 24/96 and DSD masters.

3. However, I have always been an avid copier of out-of-print CDs, many borrowed from the library, and some from friends. Before, I have just used NERO to burn them onto CD-Rs. Sound quality is acceptable to me, but I don't like the degradable nature of most CD-Rs. Note that I HARDLY ever playback these CD-Rs, though I'd like to have them in my library for archival purposes. Since I also spend much time in the USA, portability is also an issue.

4. Since I rarely play them back, from now on I'd rather rip these CDs onto a hard disc (including iPod) to save space and trouble.

5. I don't think I need a Music Server in my study, where I do all my computerization for the moment. A device in the living room's main system (which has many DACs, though none with USB in) would be nice for occasional use.

6. Though occasional use, I still want the usual (or close-to usual) quality. That rules out many "life-style" products, including most of Apple's own, I think.

OPTIONS I'M CONSIDERING IN THE MAIN SYSTEM
1. I do have a spare hard disc which I can use in setting up a full PC system, but it's kinda overkill for occasional use.

2. Buy an iPod, copy files lossless onto iPod (sufficient storage for ocassioanl use) and use something like WADIA iTransport to feed into my own DAC's which I prefer to many of the current ones. The only problem is the user-interface is less convenient, but no more so than something like Squeezebox. I am leaning towards this.

Opinions and suggestions would be welcome. Please keep in mind I am an OCCASIONAL USER.