No, it wasn't.
And thanks again for the provided info. It was one of the things I was interested in. :iagree:
The reason for wanting to know these things is that I am dedicated to audio and it's quality. I and others simply hear differences between a copy of a CD and the original CD. I would like to have as little as possible difference of course. Therefore I am also interested in possible correlations between technical measurement done in reviews and listening. As measurement make the search more efficient.
I modified my CD player to good effect. Part of the things I did in this project was on hard core digital engineering knowledge Wanna read some? Just let me know then I will give you some urls's with serious documents from f.e. Philips). Other stuff was just trying a different type of opamp, resistor, capacitor etc...
I am experienced enough with the listening proces to know that there are audible differences. I am not flawless when it comes to the listening experience but try to keep an open mind for other input from audio friends etc.
I am old (36) and educated enough to know my way around in the ideological debate on a broad spectrum of issues. In the past I studied two years of Electronics and my grades were all but the reason to cop out. So, no need for a religious discussion with a tech religioius person who thinks that no external reference is needed for design criteria etc.
For example. Design criteria for harmonic and intermodulation distorsion for phone lines were based on criteria concerning the quality of reprodution spoken word of the person. The tech reference was derived from external sources.
DCC data reduction that Philips developed in the late 80Â´s was heavily based on psychoacoustic research. That knowledge was used for data reduction on CD signals. Again a tech reference derived from external sources.
Why would an amp need this little percent of distortion? Because I think 0,01% is a beautiful figure? Why not 3,14 ppm? As I think that pie (3,14..) is a beautiful figure? As I think 3,14 is such a beautiful and intriguing fundamental number in maths that therefore it should be true for distortion figures? I think it makes more sense to get the reference from systematic psychoacoustic research.
The question of jitter is also based on tech knowledge and listening experience of the audio community, and my own experiences in the modification proces that jitter plays a definite role in listening quality.
For DA conversion it turns out to be important that there is as little as jitter as possible at the moment of DA conversion. That is not nescessarily just data jitter. Au contraire, there are plenty of other sources that need to be seriously dealt with within the CD/DVD player in the first place.
Data jitter is the jitter that is measured in the tests of burners of tech sites. Data jitter is dealt with by the computer technicians. Too high data jitter simply corrupts the data.
There are thesis that suggest thet data jitter also may play a role in the quality of audio production. They suggest that it may be propagated by the power supply lines because the servo motors need to work harder. One of my steps with the above mod project will be bringing a stabilised power supply to the servo motors department. And listen wheather it has an effect.
But like I said I have no burner, yet, and cannot corroborate this type of thinking. But, like I said I try to keep an open mind for things.
So, regarding all the above mentioned reasons it was a deliberate choice to post in the audio department of the forum and not in the hard core tech sections because I am simply looking for possible correlations between listening experience and the measured quality of the burner. Would that be too much to ask for? I hope the above makes clear I am serious and systematic about this stuff and not some type of believer.