Here are some audio and video trends for 2019:
The global Hi-Fi Systems market was valued at million US$ in 2018 and is expected to grow. EISA Awards has selected Hi-Fi product category winners, but I did not see anything really fancy new innovations that would excite me there. The Hi-Fi speaker market has seen considerable consolidation over the years but is expected to grow. The global Hi-Fi speaker system market is highly competitive. Various established international brands, domestic brands and as well as new entrants form a competitive landscape. The market is expected to have higher growth rate as compared to the previous years due to the booming electronic industry globally. It is due to the rising income of individuals globally and increasing affordability of technology products globally. Due to technological adoption and smart gadgets, North America region is showing steady growth in the Hi-Fi speaker system market. On technology standpoint the Hi-Fi market is mainly based on pretty much stabilized technology as class D amplifiers have been on mainstream for many years.
Smart TVs are everywhere. The vast majority of televisions available today are “smart” TVs, with internet connections, ad placement, and streaming services built in. Despite the added functionality, TV prices are lower than ever. Your new smart TV was so affordable because it is collecting and selling your data. It is clear that TV companies are in a cutthroat business, and that companies like Vizio would have to charge higher prices for hardware if they didn’t run content, advertising, and data businesses. Google wants sensors and cameras in every room of your home to watch, analyze, you, patents show.
Streaming services competition stays high. Apple’s embracing the TV industry for the first time: Vizio and LG TVs will support AirPlay 2 and HomeKit, while Samsung TVs will get an iTunes Movies & TV app, as well as AirPlay 2 support. Google and Amazon are playing are important players on smart speaker markets.
4K video resolution is still as hot as in 2019 – it us becoming mainstream and getting cheaper. Peraso showcases 4K wireless video at CES 2019. LG has produced a market-ready rollable OLED TV. The new 75-inch 4K Micro LED TV announced at CES 2019 proves Samsung is serious about scaling the technology to do battle with OLED. But it seems that even in 1029 “4K” trend remains woefully deficient from a compelling-content-availability standpoint. CES 2019 is already full of weird and wonderful monitors.
But new higher 8K resolution is being pushed to market. The “8K” (resolution) tagline was apparently everywhere at CES this year. Samsung announced a 98-inch 8K TV because why not. LG has come strong to CES 2019 with an 88-inch 8K OLED TV, a 75-inch 8K LED/LCD TV, HDMI 2.1, new auto calibration features, Alexa built in, and many more features. It seems that this ongoing evolution is occurring out of necessity: as a given-size (and -pixel-dense) display becomes a low profit margin commodity, manufacturers need to continually “up-rev” one or both key consumer-attention-grabbing parameters (along with less quantifiable attributes like image quality) in order to remain profitable … assuming they can continue to stimulate sufficient-sized consumer demand in the process. I am not sure if they can stimulate 8K to mass market in next few years.
Wall size TVs are coming. Samsung announced a modular TV at CES. Samsung first showcased this MicroLED TV technology at CES 2018, showcasing how the screens were composed of millions of individual LEDs. Individuals screens could be combined to create massive displays, which the company calls The Wall TV. The wall-sized displays shown in recent years at CES are, in my opinion, quite ridiculous, at least for the masses.
HDMI updates are coming. At present, the HDMI equipment uses the 2.0 standard (adopted in 2013) tht provides support for example for 4K video. HDMI Forum announced a new 2.1 standard already in November 2017, but it just starter showing in CES in January 2019. 8K fiber-optic HDMI cables seen at CES 2019. The 2.1 standard is a big change in technology at the bus bandwidth increases from 18 gigabit to 48 gigabits per second. This enables up to 10K video transmission and up to 120 frames per second.
Bendable displays are really coming to PCs and smart phones. LG’s “rollable” display shown this year neatly showcased the technology’s inherent flexibility while also addressing the question of how to hide a gargantuan display when it’s not in use. Several foldable smart phones have been shown. Chinese company Royole was showing off the FlexPai at CES in Las Vegas.
Micro displays for VR and AR glasses have developed. MicroLED is better looking, more efficient and more versatile than any previous display tech. Now all Samsung, Sony, LG and others have to do is figure out how to manufacture it affordably.Nanoco Technologies and Plessey Semiconductors have partnered to shrink the pixel size of monolithic microLED displays using Nanoco’s cadmium-free quantum-dot (CFQD quantum dots) semiconductor nanoparticle technology. Microchips and organic LEDs that deliver 4K-like high resolution displays a quarter of the size and half the weight of existing virtual reality (VR) headsets have been developed under a European Union project. Marc Andreessen says VR will be “1,000” times bigger than AR even though VR seems to be the popular whipping boy amongst the tech community.
There seems to be no shortage of angst with the current (and unfortunately burgeoning) popularity of usage of the term artificial intelligence (AI). Intelligence has been defined in many ways which makes it hard to get good picture on what is going on. I am still waiting for sensible intelligent AI to do something useful. But the ability for a sufficiently trained deep learning system to pattern-match images, sound samples, computer viruses, network hacking attempts, and the like is both impressive and effective.
Potential problems related to the coming of self-driving car technologies and cameras are expected. A man at CES in Las Vegas says that a car-mounted lidar permanently damaged the sensor in his new $1,998 Sony a7R II mirrorless camera. Man says CES lidar’s laser was so powerful it wrecked his $1,998 camera because the LIDAR laser power rules ensure lasers are safe for human eyes—but not necessarily for cameras. Is this something that camera and car manufacturers need to figure out together?
2019 Will Be the Year of Open Source from software and even hardware. Open source video player app VLC has now reached 3 billions downloads.
When almost all AV products are pushing more and more features, it seems that almost Everything is too complicated for an average Joe.
1,491 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
History Of Closed Captions: Entering The Digital Era
https://hackaday.com/2021/05/27/history-of-closed-captions-entering-the-digital-era/
When you want to read what is being said on a television program, movie, or video you turn on the captions. Looking under the hood to see how this text is delivered is a fascinating story that stared with a technology called Closed Captions, and extended into another called Subtitles (which is arguably the older technology).
Tomi Engdahl says:
DIY USB Microphone Seems Overkill; Is Surprisingly In-Depth
https://hackaday.com/2021/06/02/diy-usb-microphone-seems-overkill-is-surprisingly-in-depth/
Those of us who have been working from home through video calls for the past year can attest to the rising demand for conferencing gear such as webcams and microphones. Not wanting to spring for a boring off-the-shelf solution, serial hacker [Andy Brown] decided to design his own USB solution from scratch and show us the process from start to finish.
Deciding to go for a full digital design for the circuitry, the peripheral is based off of a MEMS microphone and an STM32 microcontroller doing the heavy lifting between it and a USB connection. [Andy] notes that MEMS microphones are very delicate and you have to design the PCB around the hole where the sound enters, which is why he went with a breakout board which has the component already soldered onto it.
https://andybrown.me.uk/2021/03/13/usb-microphone/
Tomi Engdahl says:
HOW SHOULD I CLEAN MY MICROPHONE?
https://service.shure.com/s/article/how-should-i-clean-my-microphone?language=en_US#:~:text=To%20clean%20a%20microphone%20with,get%20caught%20in%20the%20grille.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.uusiteknologia.fi/2021/06/02/superkuulo-uusin-keinoin/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.facebook.com/ericparephoto/videos/616268022664869/
Jump and freeze in 2x 360°
This is a software demo, and no, I can’t do back flips. You’ll find more more shots on https://instagram.com/ericparephoto
Details: The odd cameras are triggering at a 20ms interval, then the even cameras are triggering at the same time to freeze the jump. Fun stuff
Created using https://xanglecs.com #bullettime
Tomi Engdahl says:
Jem Aswad / Variety:
YouTube says it has paid over $4B to the music industry in the last 12 months and has added more paid members in Q1 2021 than in any other quarter since launch — YouTube paid out more than $4 billion in royalties to artists, songwriters, and rights-holders, according to a new blog post …
YouTube Says It Paid Out $4 Billion to Music Industry Over Past 12 Months
https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/youtube-4-billion-music-industry-1234986585/
YouTube paid out more than $4 billion in royalties to artists, songwriters, and rights-holders, according to a new blog post from the streaming giant’s global head of music Lyor Cohen.
While the post was short on detail, Cohen did say that “YouTube has paid over $4 billion to the music industry in the last 12 months alone and has added more paid members in Q1 ’21 than in any other quarter since launch.” He also added that the money was derived from ads and premium subscriptions, and that more than 30% of that $4 billion came from user-generated content.
Cohen said YouTube’s aim is “to become the leading revenue generator for the music industry,” although it has a ways to go: Spotify co-founder and CEO Daniel Ek announced that his company paid out over $5 billion to the music industry in 2020.
YouTube — the world’s largest streaming service by far — has long been criticized by executives and artists for its low royalty rates, particularly compared with other streaming services.
$4 billion paid to the music industry in last 12 months
https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/4-billion-paid-music-industry/
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.thomann.de/fi/rgblink_mini.htm
Tomi Engdahl says:
DIY Flat Panel Speaker Love
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/forum/tech-talk-forum/64791-diy-flat-panel-speaker-love/page73
Conventional cone speakers are very pistonic in motion so the higher the motion and the bigger the cone area equals more bass…..Exciters are more modal in motion but certain exciters do have more pistonic motion then others but its still very limited compared to most normal conventional cone drivers.
Because pistonic motion is very limited with exciters they need bigger panels to produce more bass, hence why most DML panels need to be at least 16inches or larger to produce adequate bass….If bass is not your concern and you are using a separate powered subwoofer then you can make the DML panels smaller but I still would not go smaller then 12inch in width minimum.
The reason why most people make squarish panels is because that is the panel material (pink formula hobby panels) that is readily available in that shape/size.
I prefer rectangle shape, but there is a limit to how long the rectangle shape can be because just like you said exciters radiate from a point outward……Panels that are very long require more then one exciter on the panel….the only down fall to using multiple exciters on one panel is that you will lose coherency as there is no way one can completely stop the vibrational waves from crossing each other….Its like throwing a single pebble into a pound it will produce a nice uniform circle but when you throw in more then one stone at the same time the waves overlap and cross each other therefore reducing that single uniform coherency…..There are some ways and techniques to control how much the waves overlap but you cannot completely stop it.
So any panel size just as long as its over 16inches. in width and length….The pink 24X24 panels are a good size but you can cut it to 24X20 for a rectangle shape which is what I prefer. Ideal thickness is 1/2-1/4 inch but most readily available XPS/EPS are 1-2 inches thick….Unless you have a large hot wire cutter it will be hard to cut a panel evenly.
A different kind of panel speaker
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-different-kind-of-panel-speaker.2512/
Tomi Engdahl says:
HOW AN EXCITER WORKS
https://www.techwillsaveus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/HowAnExciterWorks.pdf
The ideal material for mounting an exciter is a thin, lightweight sheet of material with high compressive strength and moderate to high bending strength. The compressive strength of the material has the greatest effect on the treble extension of the resulting ‘speaker’ (affecting ‘detail’ and ‘air’), while the bending strength of the material influences the midrange and low frequency efficiency of the ‘speaker’.
Excellent materials to use for exciter mounting include:- Aluminum – Foam Board- Corrugated cardboard sheet- Corrugated plastic ‘signboard’ material
Other materials which are less ideal but still workable include: – Plexiglas – Glass windows – Mirrors – Ceiling tiles – Wallboard – Plywood/MDF/OSB sheets
Materials which may not give desirable results:- Metal panels – Concrete – Wooden beams – Soil
- Using a larger panel or installing the exciter to a larger surface will provide deeper bass response. – A non-magnetic material should be chosen for the exciter mounting surface; mounting the exciter to a magnetic ma-terial may interfere with the magnetic circuit of the exciter’s motor assembly and impair performance.
Once the mounting surface material, shape, and size are known, the exciters can be placed. Exciter placement is critical to achieving great sound. For the best results, exciters should be placed near the center of the surface, but should be offset from each edge of the surface so that the distance from the exciter to the edge is not an even multiple of the distance from the exciter to another edge of the panel, in order to avoid the buildup of standing waves.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The ‘70s Plastic Planar Phenomenon
http://www.audioimprov.com/AudioImprov/Speakers/Entries/2012/6/15_Bertagni_SM-275_restoration.html
When polystyrene foam, the kind used in cheap beverage coolers, became commercially common in the late 1960s, it generated interest from loudspeaker designers for its light weight and high stiffness. Electro-Voice used it for the cone of the 30W, the massive 30” woofer beloved of rock bands and electronic church organs. E.R.A. made Poly-Planar all-plastic speakers, thin and waterproof. Here’s a pair of the 8” Roly Poly model.
There was a brief flurry of flat panel speakers intended to hang on the wall disguised as paintings or art. Most of them had a couple of major failings – they were prone to burn out and they sounded like garbage. Face it, a six or eight inch speaker without a baffle of any sort just sounds awful. With a conventional enclosure some of the speakers sounded OK, but were still quite limited in power handling. If placed in a regular box, the thinness which was a selling feature was lost.
The usual problem with styrene foam diaphragms is voice coil heat overcoming the glue and pulling loose. The coil is usually not vented, ie. no hole in the panel, so no air movement around the coil. In the diaphragm itself, the little styrene balls are compressed enough in the speakers I’ve seen to make a fairly dense foam which holds together well. The diaphragms are solidly held or glued to the frame at the edges, so the “cone” bends rather than operates as a piston. Usually thick at center and very thin at the edges. Some designs have circular grooves to break the diaphragm up. Nearly all have some sort of odd configuration arrived at by trial and error to deal with resonances which muddy the sound. So the plastic speaker sort of faded away.
There were a couple of serious attempts to tame the foam bending mode transducer, and Bertagni Electroacoustic Systems was the most serious of all.
Yamaha’s speaker was a lot heavier and more solid looking than these, but my memory tells me the Yammies sounded very strange to western ears.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Optical Microscope Resolves Down To 40 Nanometers
https://hackaday.com/2021/06/02/optical-microscope-resolves-down-to-40-nanometers/
Optical microscopes depend on light, of course, but they are also limited by that same light. Typically, anything under 200 nanometers just blurs together because of the wavelength of the light being used to observe it. However, engineers at the University of California San Diego have published their results using a hyperbolic metamaterial composed of silver and silica to drive optical microscopy down to below 40 nanometers. You can find the original paper online, also.
The technique also requires image processing. Light passing through the metamaterial breaks into speckles that produce low-resolution images that can combine to form high-resolution images. This so-called structured illumination technique isn’t exactly new, but previous techniques allowed about 100-nanometer resolution, much less than what the researchers were able to find using this material.
Light-shrinking material lets ordinary microscope see in super resolution
https://phys.org/news/2021-06-light-shrinking-material-ordinary-microscope-super.html
Electrical engineers at the University of California San Diego developed a technology that improves the resolution of an ordinary light microscope so that it can be used to directly observe finer structures and details in living cells.
The technology turns a conventional light microscope into what’s called a super-resolution microscope. It involves a specially engineered material that shortens the wavelength of light as it illuminates the sample—this shrunken light is what essentially enables the microscope to image in higher resolution.
“This material converts low resolution light to high resolution light,” said Zhaowei Liu, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at UC San Diego. “It’s very simple and easy to use. Just place a sample on the material, then put the whole thing under a normal microscope—no fancy modification needed.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Know Audio: Start At The Very Beginning
https://hackaday.com/2021/06/02/know-audio-start-at-the-very-beginning/
Tomi Engdahl says:
You Can DIY! Build the Mojo Maestro
October 18 2017, 05:00
https://audioxpress.com/article/you-can-diy-build-the-mojo-maestro
For many years I’ve told people in audio and recording forums that distortion is a cheap commodity, and there’s no reason to pay thousands of dollars for a “summing” mixer or other device with tubes and transformers just to get some subtle distortion. A controlled amount of soft-clipping is easy to create using two diodes and a few resistors. To prove the point, I finally decided to build such a device and the result is the Mojo Maestro.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Audiophile Cable TRUTHS: Power Cords
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNKRWvbIwUw
Video comments:
Alternating current can be “dirty” due to modern electronic devices, vacuum cleaners, microwaves, chargers, florescent lights, dimmers etc etc.
The only real thing that any decent power cord might need is a thicker gauge.
You see this is why it’s always “some guy from Canada with some forgettable product” that gets mentioned along with the anecdotal bedtime stories.
Because there are no disinterested parties in the audio industry. The amount of backdoor excuses baked into the cable claims are there for a reason. “Like the fact that there’s no ONE SIZE FITS ALL”.
Because if it was measurable and substantial it could be patented!!!
Otherwise you will just have to trust the fact that it opens up the whatchamacallit and deepens the doohickey and smells so much better than lesser power cables.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
But they will just make you think that you simply cannot hear it. What a shame to be you. If only you had good ears and a fat wallet, then all of your sonic dreams could come true.
Tomi Engdahl says:
f you’re filtering out HF/VHF noise out of AC mains, how is “too much filtering/conditioning” a thing? Unless the filter designers are chopping the sine wave at 50/60hz. I mean, isn’t that just a bad conditioner design? Show me AC mains straight to a scope, and then show the scope on the end of the fancy cable/conditioner/regenerator. THAT should be your selling point.
Tomi Engdahl says:
LF-GENERATOR Standalone Application
http://vincent.burel.free.fr/download/index.htm
Tomi Engdahl says:
http://www.tonestack.net/articles/speaker-building/speaker-cables-facts-and-myths.html
Speaker cables: do they make a difference?
(Myths and pseudo-scientific theories about speaker cables from a rational viewpoint)
Myths and pseudo-scientific theories about speaker cables.
Testability and characteristics of human hearing.
TINA simulation of an amplifier-cable-speaker system.
I have a feeling that the No. 1 of myths in audio technology is connected to speaker cables. The core of the misconception is that expensive and exotic audiophile cables transmit the audio signal in a different way and have a better sound than conventional speaker wires (zip cords).
speaker cable
Speaker cable confusion – Much ado about nothing?
Exotic audiophile speaker cable companies do everything to deceive people. And the lack of electronic and acoustical knowledge of most customers gives straight way to these pseudoscientific misconceptions. Some are really ridiculous, but the game is not for fun, because who wouldn’t want to get the most benefit with minimal work? For this, the speaker cable business seems a good opportunity. This kind of business is very far from any kind of accountability and responsibility.
In addition to this, myths are kept alive by the audiophile media. Looking for properties in a cable like “dynamics”, or a “tone character” shows very strong ignorance in this field. Audiophile cable tests over the net are mostly nothing but disguised advertisements.
Hi-end (audiophile) audio cable companies have expensive solutions to problems that don’t exist in reality. Their business model is based on willful ignorance: ignoring the facts and proved models of modern sciences like high speed signal transmission or psychoacoustics.
Of course, cables do make a difference, but the reason for the difference is not their exotic structure or the choice of an exotic material. The only difference what people can hear is caused by the resistance of the cable. And don’t forget that the speaker’s voice coil contains several meters long conventional copper wire. Not to mention the wires in the amplifier…
Some of the most popular cable myths and marketing lies:
Wire material has to be expensive and special
Oxygen-free copper, copper with silver plating is better for audio than plain copper.
Nonlinear distortion, diode rectifier effects in copper wires.
Unusual wire or cable structure for reducing skin effect or for ultra low inductance
Waveform dispersion and time based errors due to varying velocity of propagation in the audio band
Some really crazy…
There are some very crazy ideas: cable “break in”, copper wire demagnetization, directional speaker cables…
And the facts:
Wire material doesn’t have to be expensive: copper is a cheap and good conductor. And what really matters is the resistance of the wire, which has to be below a limit and this limit depends on the speaker’s impedance.
Skin effect is not important in the audio range.
Nonlinear distortion nonsense: Bad connectors may cause distortion and not wires. And if the monocrystal theory would be true, then switches and connectors would stop working.
Varying velocity of propagation nonsense: cables don’t alter arrival times and don’t cause waveform dispersion in the audio band up to five kilometers (3 miles). At this length any cable’s frequency response probably will be far from flat in the audio band. The mathematical condition for distortion-free transmission in very long cables (long is more than 5 kilometers!) is known as the Heaviside condition named after Heaviside who solved the problem of long telephone lines in 1887!
The material of the insulation doesn’t affect the sound quality, even PVC works well for audio.
Over a certain length cable inductance begin to attenuate high frequencies. The maximum recommended length depends on speaker impedance and cable design (inductance per meter). For zip cords and 4 Ohm speakers the maximum recommended length is about 10 meters. For 8 Ohm speakers this is about 20 meters!
For humans with good hearing the Just-Noticeable Level Difference can be as small as 0.3 dB for a pure sine wave. For other types of signals the threshold is higher. In addition, the human ear is extremely insensitive to amplitude changes at very low and high frequencies. If we accept, that the maximum amplitude error caused by the cable can be 0.3 dB, then the cable will be totally inaudible. (For those who want to gain deeper insight into human hearing research I recommend books from Eberhard Zwicker and Floyd E. Toole.)
In order to understand how the cable affects the signal coming from the amplifier, we have to analyze the electric model of the speaker cable (equivalent circuit, RLC model). In the model, Z represents the frequency-dependent impedance of the speaker cabinet, which will play a big role later.
In speaker cables, the propagation of the electromagnetic wave and transmission line (TL) effects are negligible in the audio range up to a few hundred meters, however, resonances due to wave reflections can negatively affect the stability of high bandwidth amplifiers even at smaller distances. For example, in a 10 meter long cable the first quarter-wave resonance (fundamental resonance) is close enough to the operating range of high-bandwidth amplifiers. Fortunately, 99% of the power amps have built-in protection and we do not have to deal with this phenomenon.
What is missing from the model is the skin effect. Fortunately, in loudspeaker cables the skin effect is negligible in the audio frequency range. For example, the resistance at 20 kHz of a wire with 1.5 mm2 cross-section will be 12% higher than the DC resistance due to the skin effect. The skin effect also has an interesting side effect: the self-induction of the cable is reduced. (For very long cables, inductance causes greater high frequency loss than the skin effect).
There is a widespread myth that cables can be characterized by their frequency response, but cables have no such property as frequency response. The frequency response of any cable depends on the output resistance of the voltage source and on the resistance or impedance of the load. Solid state amps have low output impedance, so its not an issue, but the response may change due to a different speaker.
The capacitance, inductance and resistance of the cable is directly proportional to the length of the cable. By increasing the cross-section, the resistance drops proportionally, the capacitance slightly increases and the inductance slightly decreases.
The capacitance is a secondary parameter for speaker cables. Some facts about cable capacitance:
Conventional zip-cord speaker wires have a specific (distributed) capacitance of 70 pF/m to 170 pF/m. Interwoven, ribbon or coaxial audiophile cables have much higher capacitance and can be as high as 2000 pF/m.
The capacitance of standard two conductor cables have no effect on the frequency response of class AB solid state amplifiers up to ~200 kHz.
Because the cable capacitance has no effect on the frequency response in the audio range (and in the ultrasonic range), therefore the linearity of the insulation material does not matter. In other words, even the possibility of the distortion can be completely excluded. There is no nonlinear distortion in speaker cables and there is no sonic difference between PVC, rubber, Teflon. The insulation is important at high frequencies (above 1 MHz) or in circuits with high voltages and high impedances.
Sometimes power amplifiers become unstable with long and high capacitance cables and overheat, which can lead to excess distortion or even amp failure, while these amps – like any well designed audio power amp – can drive very high capacitive loads (even 200 nF) without going into oscillation. This very rare oscillation at RF can be attributed to the lower velocity of propagation of high capacitance cables which results in lower quarter-wave resonant frequency.* If the resonance ‘meets’ some low level RF noise, e.g. residual noise of a DAC and the amplifier does not have proper RF protection, then the amp may overheat and the current protection may switch off. To avoid RF oscillation a very simple damper circuit (10 Ohm resistor parallel with a 1-2 uH coil) is added to the output of power amplifiers. The damper circuit has no effect on the frequency response in the audio frequency range and the protection is required for high-bandwidth amps if the cable is longer than about 10 meters.
* The other problem with high capacitance cables is that they become a short circuit at their quarter-wave resonance frequency, on the other hand normal zip cords or twisted cables still have some (1-2 Ohm) shunt resistance.
The inductance of the cable forms a low pass filter with the speaker. The higher the inductance or the lower the load impedance, the lower the cut-off frequency of this low pass filter. Fortunately, up to 15 or 20 meters the inductance does not cause significant (larger than 0.5 dB) loss. Speakers rated at 4 Ohm impedance are more sensitive to inductance than 8 Ohm systems.
And now here comes the most important parameter of loudspeaker cables: DC resistance . The resistance of the wire and the varying impedance of the speaker together form a frequency-dependent attenuator (voltage divider). The attenuation has a fixed (DC) component and a frequency-dependent part. In a badly designed system (using really thin and long wires), the first can be heard as a volume decrease, the latter can be heard as a change in the tone (apparent bass and mid-boost in a two-way loudspeaker).
The main rule of speaker cables is very simple: the lower the speaker impedance (load impedance), the smaller the cable resistance has to be. If we allow a maximum of 0.3 dB attenuation, the resistance of the cable can be up to 4% of the speaker’s minimum impedance. If we allow a maximum of 0.5 dB attenuation by the cable, the resistance of the cable can be up to 6% of the speaker’s minimum impedance. And for a maximum attenuation of 1 dB, the resistance of the cable can be up to 12% of the speaker’s minimum impedance. More about wire gauge selection (metric & AWG) can be found here.
Frequency response of a 10 meters (32.8 feet) long standard 1.5mm2 zip-cord speaker cable with 4, 8 and 16 Ohms load resistances
The lower the load resistance (the lower the impedance of the speaker), the more sensitive to cable resistance and inductance – and the larger, the more insensitive. Otherwise: For a given wire cross section, an 8 Ohm speaker has twice the maximum cable length than a 4 Ohm system.
The greater the resistance of the speaker cable, the more ‘bumpy’ impedance of the speaker in the frequency response is reflected. For long and thin cables this can be perceived as a change in the tone. If the speaker’s impedance were flat, then the cable would cause volume decrease only.
The loudspeaker cable is the simplest component in the signal chain: its function is to transmit the current from amplifier to loudspeakers with no audible distortion and loss. There are no complicated multi-stage signal conversions (amplification, filtering, energy transformation, modulation) as in the active elements (amplifier) or in the loudspeaker (electromechanical and acoustical transformation). Speaker cables are really boring devices compared to speakers or amplifiers.
All in all: speaker cables, wires act as a low-pass filter due to inductance and skin effect. Fortunately, these effects are well above the audible frequency band. What is important however, is that the resistance of the wire and the impedance of the speaker together form a frequency-dependent attenuator (voltage divider). With conventional copper cables that have a large enough cross-section it is possible to restrict this frequency-dependent attenuation to be sufficiently low in the audio range. The attenuation of the cable is not audible if the speaker cable resistance does not reach the 4% of speaker impedance minimum (0.3 dB criteria).
Using high-quality speaker connectors are more important than using exotic and expensive loudspeaker cables . Expensive, exotic loudspeaker cables do not improve or fix an error in an audio system, unless the cables and connectors have a very poor quality. Audiophile loudspeaker cables are optically ‘turbocharged’ conventional loudspeaker cables, and although their built quality is indisputable, the so many hiccups in their marketing are false.
Tomi Engdahl says:
SPEAKER CABLES: Science or Snake Oil
by Nelson Pass
Technical
https://www.passlabs.com/technical_article/speaker-cables-science-or-snake-oil/
Speaker Builder, 2/1980
AUDIOPHILES RECENTLY BEGAN re-examining the performance of every link in the audio playback chain, and before long their attention turned to the lowly loudspeaker cable. In response to demand, a number of companies are producing or distributing new and exotic cables claimed to improve audio power transmission from amplifier to speaker. Pointing to lower resistance and inductance, proponents of the newer cables insist they sound significantly better (“better than an expander!”); however, the subject is controversial, and some hi-fi notables claim performance increase is negligible and the higher capacitance of some new cables can cause amplifier instability and damage.1-4
Neither view is completely correct: the new cables are neither panacea nor placebo, but components whose characteristics must be evaluated in the context of their usage. Hoping to shed some light on the subject, I obtained samples of various cables, performed a number of tests, and drew a few conclusions.
Almost everyone seems to agree that ideally the amplifier should be so intimately coupled with the loudspeaker that the cable can cause no power loss or distortion. This corresponds to a wire having no resistance, inductance, or capacitance, which in real life translates to an infinitely short cable. I treat this premise as fundamental, because in general it results in the best performance. (It may not do so in some specific situations; for example, one could imagine a special case where some resistance or inductance might improve the sound.)
Regardless of the cable type, the effects it introduces to a signal are proportional to its length: the shorter the cable, the more intimate the connection between amplifier and loudspeaker. Subtle differences between cable types become more dramatic with increasing length and shrink toward zero as the cable gets shorter; thus the audiophile whose amplifiers sit close to his speakers need be less concerned than he whose cables are 40 feet long. To this end, some manufacturers have installed amplifiers within their loudspeakers, exchanging speaker cable problems for preamp ones; commercial sound distribution systems have resorted to higher voltages, which improve transmission much like the high voltage utility lines which carry power many miles.
Researchers have chiefly concentrated on the cable’s inductance and resistance, for they impede the flow of electrons between the amplifier and the loudspeaker. Resistance causes loss at all frequencies while inductance causes loss proportional to the frequency. Capacitance has not usually been considered significant because its values do not impinge upon the audio band. However, we will see later that it may sometimes important.
The new kinds of cable seek to reduce resistance and/or inductance and thus improve the amplifierspeaker connection. They fall into two categories: multistrand twin lead of various gauges (lamp or “zip” cord being an example) and low inductance – high capacitance coaxial or interwoven types. Their measured performance also falls into two categories, 0-100kHz effects and 100kHz – 40MHz effects, which for convenience I will treat separately. My analysis was greatly simplified by the fact that within the two cable categories performances were very similar; indeed, many of the cables were virtually indentical at higher frequencies.
With this much information, we might think we have the subject nailed down. However, we could easily install the finest amplifiers, cables, and terminating impedances and achieve 100 times the distortion of the amplifier alone. Loose, dirty, or oxidized connections can, while measuring well with an ohmmeter, cause high amounts of harmonic and intermodulation distortion. When high distortion occurs during an amplifier checkout at Threshold one of the first things we do is replace or tighten the cable from the amplifier to the load; we have thus cured many “defective” amplifiers.
Copper and aluminum oxidize quickly and oils from our fingers find their way to the conductor surfaces, causing poor contact; so on more than one occasion the dramatic improvement provided by an exotic cable has merely demonstrated the extremely poor quality of the previous cable’s long neglected connections. Wire connections can age, and anyone wishing to accurately evaluate the newer cable’s improved quality should first renew the contacts on his current set. Banana plugs and five-way binding posts make excellent connectors as long as they are kept clean; however, while the connector’s plated surface resists corrosion, the wire to the connector interface can become bad and should be periodically checked, especially if it is subject to motion.
OPINIONS
At this point many audiophiles are wondering, “Where are the listening tests?” I have listened to these cables on a variety of amplifiers (mostly my own) and loudspeakers, including Magneplanar Tympani 1 D’s, MG II A’s, modified Dayton Wright XG 8 MK III’s (as shown in Fig. 6) Cabasses; I have also heard some examples on Dahlquist and Snell loudspeakers.
Frankly, I found it difficult to assess the results except at the extremes of performance. For 10 foot lengths with properly terminated cables and speakers with inductive high frequency characteristics, the differences between low inductance cable and twin conductor are extremely subtle and subject to question. With a low output inductance amplifier and a Heil tweeter (whose impedance is a nearly perfect 6ohm resistive) the difference was discernible as a slightly but not unpleasant softening of the highest frequencies. Fulton or Monster cables were a clear improvement over 24 or even 18 gauge, though a little less subtle than I would have expected, leading me to believe that the effort associated with heavier cables pays off in bass response and in apparent midrange definition, especially at crossover frequencies. The worst case load, the modified Dayton Wright electrostatics, presented some interesting paradoxes: the extremely low impedance involved showed the greatest differences between all the types of cables. However, the best sound cables were not necessarily electrically the best because several amplifiers preferred the highest resistance cable. In one case, I had to use 24 gauge cable to prevent tripping the amplifier’s protection circuitry.
CONCLUSIONS
Who am I to dispute the feelings of audiophiles who, evaluating any cable in the context of program source, amplifier, speaker, and listening room, decide they can hear the difference? A few guidelines have emerged here, but the final judgment belongs to the user. All the special cables mentioned worked well on the test bench and, given the assumption that series impedance should be minimized, all of them work better than 16 gauge wire. If, like many audiophiles, you have spent a small (or large) fortune on your hi-fi system, money spent for high quality cables and connectors is a reasonable investment.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Digitaalisen videon värimäärittely
https://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/81262
Värimäärittelyn vaiheita ovat muun muassa valoisuusarvojen ja kontrastin tasapainottaminen, värisävyjen normalisointi ja uudelleen määrittely sekä uudelleen valaisu maskien avulla. Insinöörityössä värimääriteltiin näytevideo. Värimäärittelytyössä haasteena oli dynamiikaltaan kapean videomateriaalin käsittely muotoon, jossa kaikki sävyalueet ovat puhtaita eivätkä leikkaudu liian jyrkästi tummien ja vaaleiden sävyjen osalta.
DIGITAALINENVÄRIMÄÄRITTELYVÄRIMÄÄRITTELIJÄN ROOLI ELOKUVAN JÄLKITUOTANNOSSA
https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/16304/Ruohela_Inka.pdf
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://smileaudiovisual.fi/varimaarittely/
Ashley Jones says:
Incredibly very cool web-site. Unbelievably good toward go through and rather significantly attention-grabbing content. Surely year incorporates not however come back and greet.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Panasonic WJ-MX50 Video Mixer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBM54uyP82g
Let’s take a look at an amazing piece of linear video editing equipment!
Macrovision vs Panasonic WJ-MX50A. Copy Protected VHS source on a Pro Switcher! What happens?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPkV4Nz7oe0
Latest “new to me” toy! A Panasonic WJ-MX50A Professional Production Switcher. After 20 years of wanting a Professional Video Editing Switcher, I finally found one for a thrifty price! In this vid, I discuss why an item that cost thousands of dollars 20 years ago would now sell for so little. I briefly discuss key features of the Panasonic WJ-MX50A, and see what happens when a VHS video with Macrovision Copyguard Copy Protection is fed into one of the inputs on the switcher.
After making a 1st Generation dub of a Macrovision tape with no attempt at filtering the signal, I then use the “Wipe” feature of the Panasonic to demonstrate “before” and “after” on the original tape, and the one dubbed using Macrovision.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Video Production Switchers [Understanding the basics]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4FsO1vVtC8
“Production switchers. What are they? Why are they used? …How do they work and why are there SO many buttons? Believe it or not, behind virtually every multi-cam broadcast – sits a person operating one of these button behemoths… whilst directly impacting what the viewer sees on screen. In this video, we’re going to unravel the mysteries surrounding production switchers and break down the concepts that make them so instrumental to the live TV environment!”
In this video we discuss:
- What are production switchers?
- Who operates a production switcher?
- Basic video switchers
- Basic routers
- Introduction to video reference
- Clean transitions vs glitch switching
- Understanding keyers
- Understanding mix effects buses
Tomi Engdahl says:
Why is a simple video like this not the first video that shows up when I search?
This guy was way ahead of his time on YouTube. 7 years later, 2020 for God’s sake. There still are no tutorials that can top this. Bring this guy back.
How Sound Works (In Rooms)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPYt10zrclQ
Acoustic Geometry shows how sound works in rooms using Nerf Disc guns, 1130 feet of fluorescent green string, and Moiré patterns, and a before-and-after example.
Tomi Engdahl says:
How Speakers Make Sound
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxdFP31QYAg
Just one speaker can reproduce an entire orchestra of sounds. How is this possible? The design is deceptively simple, with incredibly complex potential.
Tomi Engdahl says:
SMSG50
Active seismic 50 inch
infrasonic subwoofer
https://www.aia-cinema.com/active-speakers/smsg50.html
Equipped with a gigantic custom-built 127 cm/50” driver powered by DSP-controlled 6000 watts using the AIA Speaker Management technology, the SMSG50 is hands down the most powerful cinema subwoofer in the world.
Due to its ultra-low resonance frequency and its sealed braced enclosure concept, this mega subwoofer delivers an extremely fast impulse response and class leading low group delay compared to any subwoofer out in the market.
SMSG50 is able to reproduce the lowest frequencies literally down to 1 Hz. With each maximum stroke, the SMSG50 moves as much air as forty standard 18″ subwoofers.
Custom-built 50“ woofer, 34,5cm voice coil, 35mm linear excursion, with AIA Speaker Management technology
Tomi Engdahl says:
ATEM Streaming Bridge: Get program and multi-view out of ATEM Mini Pro/ISO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0-RQuaAXoI
The ATEM Streaming Bridge is a super cheap device that allows you to do two main things:
1. Get program directly out of an ATEM Mini Pro (or ISO)’s ethernet port.
2. Receive signal from a friend’s ATEM Mini Pro (or ISO) over the internet with just a 3+ second delay.
In this video, I’ll show you how to do both things. I also include a diagram for how I use the ATEM Streaming Bridge and a Blackmagic bidirectional converter box to get multiple program and multi-view signals out of the ATEM Mini Pro, truly making it a pro piece of gear!
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://fi.feelworld.ltd/products/feelworld-livepro-l1-v1-multi-camera-video-mixer-switcher-4-hdmi-input-usb3-0-live-streaming?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI6tDirKuH8QIVdtURCB0PUgQ_EAEYASAAEgKjOfD_BwE
Tomi Engdahl says:
Eminent Technology TRW-17 Rotary Subwoofer
Scott Wilkinson | Aug 17, 2010
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/eminent-technology-trw-17-rotary-subwoofer
And now for something completely different—a subwoofer that looks like a fan and can reproduce frequencies down to 1Hz and below. Yep, you read that right—1Hz and below. Developed by Bruce Thigpen and available from Eminent Technology, the Thigpen Rotary Woofer Model 17 (TRW-17) breaks entirely new ground at the very bottom of the sonic spectrum.
The TRW-17 is nothing like a conventional subwoofer. A motor spins a set of blades at a constant speed—typically 600 to 800 rpm—and the incoming audio signal modulates the pitch (angle) of the blades in correspondence with the signal’s waveform. This launches an acoustic sound wave both forward and backward from the spinning blades. The greater the change in blade pitch, the greater the amplitude of the resulting sound wave.
Another obvious feature of the measurement graph shown here is that the response falls off rapidly above 20Hz. This is due in part to the electronics, but it’s also the flip side of the well-matched acoustic impedance at low frequencies—as the frequency rises, the number of blade rotations per cycle decreases. This rolloff could be mitigated by spinning the blades faster, but that would also increase blade noise, making it audible in the listening room, even with the manifold chamber.
The TRW-17′s specified frequency range is 1 to 30Hz (±4dB) with a maximum acoustic output greater than 115dB SPL from 1 to 20Hz. As a result, a conventional sub is required to fill in from there to the point at which the main speakers take over, which is typically 80Hz or so.
How much to rock the house this hard? The TRW-17 itself goes for $12,900, and the motor controller adds another $350. Eminent Technology also sells an amp and crossover for $700.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Oliver Haslam / iMore:
Apple introduces Object Capture, an API on macOS Monterey that enables developers to turn 2D images of real-world objects into 3D models optimized for AR — Apple announced a ton of new software updates today and they all need new tools to allow developers to do what they need to if they want to make great apps.
Apple announces new tools, features, and more for developers
Developers, now’s your time!.
https://www.imore.com/apple-announces-new-tools-features-and-more-developers
Tomi Engdahl says:
Chris Davies / SlashGear:
Facebook will not take a cut of creators’ paid online events, fan subscriptions, and upcoming independent news products until 2023, citing Apple’s steep 30% cut
Zuckerberg blasts Apple in creators pitch for Facebook’s new Patreon rival
https://www.slashgear.com/zuckerberg-blasts-apple-in-creators-pitch-for-facebooks-new-patreon-rival-07676553/
Jay Peters / The Verge:
Facebook says it will show creators who are using its new tools how much Apple, Google, and others take as a cut of their earnings through a payout interface — The company will launch a new interface showing how fees affect earnings — Less than two hours before Apple’s big Worldwide …
https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/7/22522706/facebook-creators-apple-google-fees-payment-interface-events?scrolla=5eb6d68b7fedc32c19ef33b4
Tomi Engdahl says:
Top 10 reasons why cassettes are back & why they should stay!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P3DwL72ylk
Why cassettes are making a comeback? Why we should hope they stay? What is Cassette Culture? All this plus a few tips for a quality playback choice. Long live tape!
Video comments:
I like all physical media “records, tapes, CDs, etc.”! Simply for “choices” , back in the day you had lots of choices! These days its like “take the one format that makes us the most money or is the most convenient! Let’s get back to choices!
Making home made Mix tapes in the late 70s early 80s was the one trendy behavior that scared record company music executives because home made cassette tapes were traded and given away which paved the way for the executives to print on the vinyl packaging “home taping is killing music”. They hated that people traded mix tapes back in the early 80s. They would never attempt that push again. Hip hopsters got their “soundbites” from mix tapers!
They’re small. They’re convenient. They can often sound rather fabulous. They’re inexpensive. That’s a cassette tape. And also just a little bit too retro for the average person.
a lot of the more underground bands are releasing music on cassette.
Good tape CrO2 II type or Metal IV type and good cassette deck tape recording can used for professional recording in music studio for very good analog warm sound and very natural sound. Than convert that sound in computer through professional sound card for DAW recording. Result is amazing!
Reel to reel tape recording is too much expensive. Digital sound is only good for editing. Digital sound is dead sound.
I didn’t hear one compelling reason why I should pull my old Denton three head deck out of the attic. Serving up variable rate MP3s still sounds better. And its just a matter of making play lists to replace those mixed tapes.
Cassette deck heads wear and get dirty and become magnetised and need realigning (azimuth), cheap tapes lack dynamic range, decent quality tapes are expensive and still lack dynamic range. Tape decks have wow & flutter and belts need replacing occasionally and the complex mechanics fail. Cassettes have had their day and the format was pushed to its max.
I know this because I worked in a service department and repaired dozens of them.
I don’t care about how a cassette tape looks and smells, only about how it sounds, same with any other media format. 12″ 45 RPM has the best sound, pure analogue and very dynamic and as with all vinyl it wears out a little each time it’s played and CDA format is just about good enough, higher sampling rates & bit depths do sound better but you need a decent system to hear the difference. For now I’ll put up with FLAC format on hard disks, a decent FireWire audio interface, DSP filtering & time alignment and electrostatic loudspeakers and a stereo transmission line subwoofer.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Loads Of Old LESLIE Speakers! what do they sound like?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR1q9NkmmRM
Tomi Engdahl says:
Googlen oman prosessorit jauhavat nyt Youtube-videoita
https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/12248-googlen-oman-prosessorit-jauhavat-nyt-youtube-videoita
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google Stadia is coming to Chromecast with Google TV and Android TV on June 23rd
Official Android TV support is on the way
https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/7/22522416/google-stadia-chromecast-tv-nvidia-shield-android-devices-list-date?scrolla=5eb6d68b7fedc32c19ef33b4
Google is expanding the availability of its Stadia game streaming service to more TVs and streaming devices later this month. The first version of Stadia on Chromecast with Google TV is launching on June 23rd, more than eight months after the device launched without official Stadia support.
Alongside Chromecast with Google TV support, Stadia will also be available on a number of Android TV devices on June 23rd. Not every Android TV device is supported, but Nvidia’s Shield TV devices have made the list.
Tomi Engdahl says:
CDs: Forgotten, but still amazing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAIdYernX0w
Vinyl is booming, streaming services are more popular than ever, and we’re all depressed. This means one thing and one thing only: it’s time to reassess CDs.
Yes, friends, you read that correctly. The humble compact disc has been unloved for far too long. And we’re here to change that. And your opinion. After this you’ll no longer view CDs as a boring bit of old technology. Instead, you’ll view them as a medium we should all value and throw ourselves at the feet of.
Read the full article here:
CDs are the most under-appreciated music format, fight me
Ready to throw hands since ’88
https://thenextweb.com/news/cds-compact-discs-underappreciated-music-format-lossless-cd-analysis
Vinyl is booming, streaming services are more popular than ever, and we’re all depressed. This means one thing and one thing only: it’s time to reassess CDs.
Yes, friends, you read that correctly. The humble compact disc has been unloved for far too long. And I’m here to change that. And your opinion. After this you’ll no longer view CDs as a boring bit of old technology. Instead, you’ll view them as a medium we should all value and throw ourselves at the feet of.
Probably. I’m not in control of your mind. Whatever.
Defining what we mean by music quality
We can’t really talk about music — especially digital music — without the topic of quality coming up. In this first part of the article, we’re going to concentrate on what that actually means. This will help us understand where CDs fit in the ecosystem.
First off, I think you can split understanding of music quality into three main sections:
Quality of recording: as the name suggests, this is how the piece has been recorded. The production. The mix. All those elements that you, a listener, have no control over, but are integral to how the track sounds.
Quality of listening equipment: basically… how good is your gear? If you’re listening to something on a $10 pair of earbuds, you aren’t going to get the same experience as someone, say, using the Focal Radiance.
Quality of the file or format: finally, what’s the quality of the actual thing you’re playing? How accurately can it reproduce the original recording?
Because we’re talking about CDs in this piece, we’re going to be looking mainly at the last point, with a little sprinkling of the second here and there.
What music quality actually means
Here is where I want to provide some context about what all the above actually means.
A short disclaimer though: “quality” is subjective. There are people who will prefer the sound of compressed files. That’s life. On top of this, “quality” in the way we’re talking about it (the most accurate reproduction) depends on equipment too. If you don’t have good gear, you won’t hear the subtle details.
Anyway, with all that in mind, let’s make some broad brush strokes about how lossy vs. lossless files sound:
A lossy 128kbps MP3 file is compressed enough most people will hear degradation — say, the music sounding slightly tinny.
The higher this kilobits per second figure rises though, the less most of us will be able to hear quality improvments. For example, a lot of people drop off around the 200kbps mark.
Then you get to the 320kbps MP3. The majority of folks won’t be able to tell the difference between this and a lossless file — unless you have the right equipment and some strong critical listening skills.
That’s a good list, right? WOULD BE A SHAME IF SOMEONE MADE A DIAGRAM OF IT.
What I’m getting at is simple: lossless audio isn’t a big of a deal for most people. And that’s totally cool.
Our beautiful, spellbinding, and under-appreciated CDs
Now, friends, we’re going to get granular on the reasons why I think CDs are incorrectly unloved. They are far more than flea market fodder and things only your gran buys because she can’t work out that new fangled phone. No, they’re wonderful — and I’m gonna tell you why.
CD quality is immaculate
I said above that high quality (250kbps+) MP3s are good enough for most people — I’m not going to backtrack on that, but… are you most people?
This is how I see the lossless argument. I don’t think lossless makes much of a difference when you’re listening to new music. If you’re browsing Spotify for fresh artists, or have something on in the background, the extra quality is, honestly, barely noticeable.
You really have to listen in a critical and quite unnatural way to hear any difference.
Where I do find joy with lossless audio is with music I know intimately. These are the tracks and albums I’ve listened to enough that I hear the tiny breaks in someone’s voice, the particular buzz of a half-misplaced finger in a chord, or the upper register when the drummer catches the crash cymbal stand.
And CDs deliver that.
I mentioned earlier in the sampling rate and bit-depth explanations that the 44.1kHz and 16-bit figures were beyond the capabilities of most people’s hearing. Well, to reiterate, this is the quality of CDs.
And that’s no coincidence. CDs were literally designed to outstrip your ears.
(NOTE: There is a big topic of contention in the audio world about “hi-res music,” which are digital files with greater quality than a CD — in other words, above the 44.1kHz, 16-bit threshold. Some people claim you can hear the difference, others that you physically cannot. Basically, if hi-res music makes you happy, that’s great. No need to get angry with us about it).
What this all amounts to is that CDs deliver some of the finest audio you can buy. And, on a fundamental level, I love it. The detail; the lows, mids, and highs; and the depth of the sound is supremely phenomenal.
But let’s be as balanced as we can here. CDs aren’t the only place you can get music of this quality. Streaming services like TIDAL (and soon Spotify) offer it too — which is a fantastic option to have.
Vinyl vs. CDs
This is a slight tangent, but I think there’s an important discussion to have comparing the two most dominant physical music formats.
I love records. I prefer the feel and sound of them over every other music medium. At the risk of sounding like a wanker (although that ship sailed some time ago), vinyl is special. The sound is rich and warm, the playing experience joyous — the whole process is simply magnificent.
Despite all this, CDs are better. God, I can’t believe I just typed that. Let me explain that horrendous statement using… facts.
First off, vinyl is far more temperamental than CDs. Records are pretty easy to warp, break, and damage over time — CDs are a lot hardier. Secondly, there’s so much that can go wrong with actually playing a record. To get the best out of the format you need a good record player, a solid cartridge, a new-ish needle, and a decent phono pre-amp. With CDs you just plug in the player.
CDs are under-appreciated: the summary
Look, compact discs aren’t perfect. Not really close. They aren’t as useful as streaming services, or as romantic as vinyl, but they do deserve more respect than they receive.
Basically, what I’m saying is that CDs are under-appreciated, especially by the “younger” generations. (At 32 I can no longer be considered young). The format delivers optimum sound quality, flexibility, can function as backbone and back-up of a digital music collection, and can be stored easily. What’s not to like?
And, I’ll tell you this: CDs will rise again. Whether it’s in a few months or a couple of years, we’re going to see a compact disc resurgence. Come on, young people, I’m relying on you to make me look smart.
Anyway… let’s shift the discussion from the CD format, to how you can actually play the damn things.
How do CDs fit in your listening habits?
This is the biggest consideration you have to make before getting into CDs. If you’re going to spend all the money on the equipment, then it has to slot into your life seamlessly.
Firstly, I’m the owner of a range of different music-playing hardware. I’ve got a record player, a tape deck, a streamer, a digital music library, a Spotify subscription, and a CD player.
When it comes to physical formats, I’ll often put on records in the evening, especially while cooking. Weekends are also a prime time for vinyl. This also tends to be the format I use when I buy new music.
With the tape deck, I sometimes use it for playing old pop tracks (80s music sounds especially good), but more often than not I play ambient albums on it.
Where I’ve found the CD player sits in my life is with classical music. The precision of that genre, its dynamic range, its focus on small details, all these things add up to make listening to it on compact disc the most glorious experience. It’s supremely pleasant to whack on a violin concerto with a pair of wonderful headphones and get lost.
The CD player is also fun as a nostalgia tool, as it means I can go through my compact discs from back in the day
This is just how I balance using the different hardware and music formats. This is far from the only way
The big old conclusion
Phew — we’re finally coming to the end of this piece. We’ve touched a huge number of topics along the way, but I think we can get this done succinctly: it’s time to reconsider the humble CD.
Sometimes it feels as though the audio world is always chasing after the next best thing, searching for ever-higher quality, but, in reality, there’s little out there that exceeds the humble compact disc.
But let’s take stock: for the large majority of people, streaming is perfect. The quality drop-off between lossy and lossless is minimal, plus shit like Apple Music is so damn convenient.
But… if you had to choose between collecting vinyl or CD? Go vinyl. Sorry, CDs. It might not be logical but it’s what my heart says.
That doesn’t mean I don’t love CDs. Quite the opposite.
In regards to physical music, they deliver the best price to sound quality to flexibility ratio. And yeah, it’s strange to me that vinyl is so adored, yet CDs are unloved by the music world at large. I expect this is going to switch around in the coming years though.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Before you pay for Spotify HiFi, try to pass this lossless audio test
https://thenextweb.com/news/before-you-pay-for-spotify-hifi-try-to-pass-this-lossless-audio-test
Spotify yesterday announced a ‘HiFi’ upgrade tier for its streaming service that provides lossless audio, promising music free of compression artifacts. Although it won’t be available until later this year, Spotify HiFi promises “CD-quality” audio and aims to steer audiophiles away from other lossless streaming competition like Tidal and Deezer.
But even if you consider yourself an audiophile, you probably don’t need to pay extra for lossless music. At least, not in order to make your music sound better.
It’s true that most music streaming services compress audio in one way or another in order to minimize data usage, almost always leading to some lost information. There are ways of compressing music losslessly, but they generally can’t reduce file size as much as a decent lossy compression.
It’s unsurprising, then, that most services turn to lossy compression. After all, the vast majority of listeners do not have the hearing ability to tell the difference between lossless audio and music that is compressed at a high enough quality.
Spotify Premium (the existing, $9.99 ad-free tier) already streams at a maximum of 320 kbps (256 kbps on the web)
Although at low bitrates the differences between lossy and lossless audio can be quite obvious, I’m willing to bet most people can’t tell apart a lossless file from a 256 kbps MP3 one — let alone a file compressed with the more modern Ogg codec that Spotify uses.
Our hearing is subject to a whole lot of placebo. Simply believing that a certain upgrade or key specification will make your speakers or headphones sound better is often more likely to cause to an ‘improvement’ than any actual change. Still, many golden-eared audiophiles will swear they can hear a difference without evidence.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Top Zero-cost Hi-Fi Tips & Tweaks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiWHXzu7wAE
Discover the 10 most effective and inexpensive, costless, zero-cost tips and tweaks to get the best out of your Hi-Fi system!
Tomi Engdahl says:
Cecilia D’Anastasio / Wired:
As Twitch turns 10, a look at how the service pioneered the patronage system that is prevalent across the internet’s creator economy today
https://www.wired.com/story/twitch-turns-10-creator-economy/
Tomi Engdahl says:
Tim Peterson / Digiday:
PwC survey: of time spent watching streaming video in 2020, people in the US spent 62% of their time on subscription-based and 32% on ad-supported services
Subscription-based streamers outstrip ad-supported services’ share of watch time
https://digiday.com/future-of-tv/subscription-based-streamers-outstrip-ad-supported-services-share-of-watch-time/
Ad-supported streaming services have some catching up to do. Subscription-based streaming services, which are largely ad-free, continue to dominate the amount of time people spend streaming video. But there is an opportunity for ad-supported streamers to edge into subscription-based services’ share of audiences’ attentions.
Of the time that people spent streaming video in 2020, 62% was spent on subscription-based services versus 32% on ad-supported services, according to a survey of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted by auditing and consulting firm PwC.
The reason for the gap may not be a simple matter of people preferring to watch movies and shows without commercial interruptions. That’s a likely contributing factor, but another consideration is that “there are a lot more [subscription-based] platforms than [ad-supported] platforms,” said Todd Supplee, partner at PwC.
With the exception of Hulu, the preeminent streaming services have been subscription-based and sans ads. Netflix and Amazon Prime Video have historically dominated the market, and more recently Disney’s Disney+ and WarnerMedia’s HBO Max have risen the ranks without relying on advertisers for revenue.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Church Live Streaming Setup 2021 | Best Cameras, Switcher, Software, and Multi-Streaming Platforms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufBmroGkzaM
In this video, you’ll get and in-depth look at a live streaming setup for churches that uses the ATEM Mini Pro and ProPresenter for video switching and streaming.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_grading
Tomi Engdahl says:
Under 30 audiophiles show off their systems!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqRJpq-hcRQ
Tomi Engdahl says:
We got the Kick-Proof TV from China!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eSADWuZskk
Tomi Engdahl says:
What is the damping factor of an amplifier?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idxT7VVYyxo
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.adventures-in-audio.com/add-reverb-to-your-recordings-using-the-natural-echo-chamber-technique
Tomi Engdahl says:
OLD DSLR LENS BECOMES USEFUL SOLDERING MAGNIFIER
https://hackaday.com/2021/06/09/old-dslr-lens-becomes-useful-soldering-magnifier/
Soldering tiny stuff is hard, if not impossible, without some optical assistance. [Ad_w00000] was having just this problem, so built himself a soldering magnifier to help.
The magnifier uses a variety of components [Ad_w00000] had lying around. For the optical side of things, an old Canon DSLR zoom lens was pressed into service as the main magnifying element. The lens was then fitted with an old laptop webcam, which was glued into an old lens extender to avoid modifying the main lens itself. The webcam is hooked up to an Asus Tinkerboard fitted with a touchscreen display to show the images. The whole lens assembly is then fitted onto an old TV stand to enable it to sit far enough above the work surface to focus properly.
https://www.instructables.com/Soldering-Microscope-From-SLR-Zoom-Lens-and-TV-Wal/
Tomi Engdahl says:
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/Arieltxt2.html
Tomi Engdahl says:
Soundproof Blankets: Do they Really Work? (TEST RESULTS)
https://soundproofinglife.com/soundproof-blankets-do-they-really-work-test-results/
The ever-growing topic of soundproofing is starting to get some real traction these days. In that case, using a soundproof blanket for soundproofing purposes is one of the most common and cheapest ways of doing the job.
However, do soundproof blankets even work? Or the hype surrounding these blankets is all for nothing. Let’s find that out.
If you want a straight answer then, Yes Soundproof Blankets really work but don’t expect them to block 100 per cent of external noise. Like soundproof curtains, they’re more of sound deadeners rather than sound blockers.
Tomi Engdahl says:
https://www.lifesize.com/en/blog/video-conferencing-lighting-solutions/