Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41

Thread: Soundproofing

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Punggol
    Posts
    53

    Default

    The Goldmund Laser Turntable would be my dream to own and shoot... :P

    Tubes are nice with or without socks.

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by phero-man
    The Goldmund Laser Turntable would be my dream to own and shoot... :P

    Tubes are nice with or without socks.
    Anybody had compared LP with SACD ?
    I know the technical details on both system, but I would like to hear some comment on it based on listening experience, not the technical aspect.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by tsdh

    Anybody had compared LP with SACD ?
    I know the technical details on both system, but I would like to hear some comment on it based on listening experience, not the technical aspect.
    Just as we cannot memorize colour, we cannot memorize sound. And not having the chance to hear both side by side, it's going to be difficult to judge which is better. There's just too many factors involved. What I can say is that I've heard great LPs and bad SACDs, as well as the reverse.

    Regards
    CK

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang
    Just as we cannot memorize colour, we cannot memorize sound. And not having the chance to hear both side by side, it's going to be difficult to judge which is better. There's just too many factors involved. What I can say is that I've heard great LPs and bad SACDs, as well as the reverse.
    Regards
    CK
    Well, probably some of the audiophiles here use LP and SACD in their system. So side-by-side comparison is possible.
    The only problem is to find recording material from the same master on both format.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Punggol
    Posts
    53

    Default

    we can't compare digital and analog.

    analog : infinite sampling rate but high floor noise
    digital : low flow noise but only 44.1 or 96khz sampling rate for commercial applications

  6. #26

    Default

    LPs are a non-issue for newcomers to the hobby. 2nd hand records in audiophile condition are expensive while SACD prices are dropping....

    The variety of SACDs is slowly increasing, why I even saw an Ah Mei SACD... (hmmm, maybe that wasn't such a good example)

  7. #27

    Default

    Originally posted by phero-man
    we can't compare digital and analog.

    analog : infinite sampling rate but high floor noise
    digital : low flow noise but only 44.1 or 96khz sampling rate for commercial applications
    i'm pretty sure my Natalie Merchant disc is 192Khz with MLP.

    btw Hi-Fi News had a very detailed technical series on DVD-A vs SACD. A short summary is this: whereas DVD-A has the theoretical superiority, implementation-wise, SACD currently has the edge.

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Punggol
    Posts
    53

    Default

    MLP? paiseh.. what's that? 192? it's a digital format?

  9. #29

    Default

    Originally posted by phero-man
    MLP? paiseh.. what's that? 192? it's a digital format?
    Meridian Lossless Packing. Its the compression format for DVD-A

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by phero-man
    we can't compare digital and analog.

    analog : infinite sampling rate but high floor noise
    digital : low flow noise but only 44.1 or 96khz sampling rate for commercial applications
    That's the reason I'm asking about comparison in the sense of listening with our ears, not by comparing its technical spec.
    A superior technical spec may not be superior in our ears, as demonstrated by vacuum tube vs transistor.

    SACD has a sampling rate of 64x44.1kHz= 2.8224MHz in 1-bit DSD stream, not PCM, a totally new method of digital encoding.
    There is no such thing like 16-bit, 24, or else.

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    2,548

    Default

    Originally posted by tsdh

    That's the reason I'm asking about comparison in the sense of listening with our ears, not by comparing its technical spec.
    A superior technical spec may not be superior in our ears, as demonstrated by vacuum tube vs transistor.
    Yes there are ways to successfully compare any two systems side by side, with an optimised triple blind test being the optimum method but the process isn't either easy nor cheap to setup and requires some fairly heavy control issues to be dealt with as well as a good understanding of psycho-accoustic issues.
    The Ang Moh from Hell
    Professional Photography - many are called, few are chosen!

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Punggol
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I'm not sure about DSD though. end of the day the human hearing although capable of a very limited level of frequency response, we can pick up hypersonic ambience cues which goes way into the nyquist frequency for the digital realm. SACD's new... the 1 bit refers probably to the D/A format. resolution of amplitude variation is still multi-bit.

    hope this helps.

  13. #33

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    Contrary to popular belief, the egg crates does not soundproof the room. It only helps to deaden the room from undesirable internal reflections which is detrimental to the imaging and soundstaging of that hifi you have inside.

    Regards
    CK
    Egg crates are only good in eliminating standing waves in a room with parallel walls. They don't absorb sound waves like Sonex acoustic foams do.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Barrios
    Egg crates are only good in eliminating standing waves in a room with parallel walls. They don't absorb sound waves like Sonex acoustic foams do.
    That was what I was trying to say, your version is much more accurate.

    Regards
    CK

  15. #35

    Default Re: Soundproofing

    Originally posted by fastwatch
    anybody knows where soundproofing services are available? that is to soundproof my room? or anywhere that sells soundproof windows? did a check on yahoo singapore but failed to find anything relevant.

    thanks.
    You can try getting some Sonex acoustic foam from Adelphi. I'm not sure who is dealing in it but am pretty sure they are available there. It is not advisable to fill your whole room with soundproofing materials as they would make the music sound dead - lack of harmonics and natural room ambience. Many studio control rooms are approaching the LEDE concept of mix-down. Meaning, soundproof the upper half of the room while maintaining it 'live' at the lower half. If you have problems with low frequencies, get the thicker version of the Sonex.

  16. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Originally posted by phero-man
    I'm not sure about DSD though. end of the day the human hearing although capable of a very limited level of frequency response, we can pick up hypersonic ambience cues which goes way into the nyquist frequency for the digital realm.
    SACD's new... the 1 bit refers probably to the D/A format. resolution of amplitude variation is still multi-bit.

    hope this helps.
    The SACD has no D/A converter, since it is not PCM encoded. But it use DSD which is actually a PDM (Pulse Density Modulation) encoding. Unfortunately we're already familiar with PCM-word 16-bit, 24-bit, etc. so each time we hear something on digital, then our mind will always refer to that multi-bit word, which is not necessarily true.
    To understand a simplified overview of DSD encoding, you may go to this site:
    http://www.daisy-laser.com/tech3e.htm

  17. #37

    Default Re: Re: Soundproofing

    sonex is not going to help with lower frequencies.
    http://www.mhtc.net/~lowey/SONEXone.pdf look at the absorption co-efficients for 125Hz (and thats like midbass...) versus the midrange absorption. Thick sonex will kill the midrange long before it touches the bass.

    compare to say a tube trap
    http://www.asc-hifi.com/products/tt-technicals.htm


    Originally posted by Barrios
    You can try getting some Sonex acoustic foam from Adelphi. I'm not sure who is dealing in it but am pretty sure they are available there. It is not advisable to fill your whole room with soundproofing materials as they would make the music sound dead - lack of harmonics and natural room ambience. Many studio control rooms are approaching the LEDE concept of mix-down. Meaning, soundproof the upper half of the room while maintaining it 'live' at the lower half. If you have problems with low frequencies, get the thicker version of the Sonex.

  18. #38
    Timmy Chan
    Guests

    Default Re: Soundproofing

    Hi everyone, I am suprised that you are having a lot of difficulty finding a soundproofing company. I looked on google just now and found noisestop systems singapore. Well that and my freind has used them before and herd they did a good job.

    Back to your point about double glazing I dont think it will work very well as in Singapore the double glazing glass is not as thick as other countrys so actually we dont follow the same design, plus glass is not a soundproofing material; not when it is so thin.

    here is a link for the site i found with the relevant page::
    http://www.noisestopsystems.sg/windo...y_products.php

  19. #39
    Timmy Chan
    Guests

    Default Re: Soundproofing

    There is a lot of people asking questions in here and thought i would help....

    Using eggbox does not work for soundproofing, using curtains does not work, carpet on your wall also does not. Anything that is a light weight material will not work.
    You have to use the propper stuff that is tested.
    If the company you goto has no spec sheets then it doesnt work.

    The first time i got soundproofing i was riped off i spent money on crap that didnt work.
    I then find NoiseStop and they solve my problem and new exactly what they were doing.
    I did a lot of research into this as i didnt want to get ripped off again but im happy with the results.
    Oh for you thinking of price the price was good compared to other companys i found on the net at least a few K cheaper.

  20. #40
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Soundproofing

    Quote Originally Posted by Timmy Chan View Post
    Hi everyone, I am suprised that you are having a lot of difficulty finding a soundproofing company. I looked on google just now and found noisestop systems singapore. Well that and my freind has used them before and herd they did a good job.

    Back to your point about double glazing I dont think it will work very well as in Singapore the double glazing glass is not as thick as other countrys so actually we dont follow the same design, plus glass is not a soundproofing material; not when it is so thin.

    here is a link for the site i found with the relevant page::
    http://www.noisestopsystems.sg/windo...y_products.php
    Hey man.... you DO KNOW you dug up an extremely OLD THREAD that was in 2002 where sound proffing technology was older then what you recommend now in 2009. heheh.... And those folk I doubt are even hanging about CS anymore and might even have found answers to their questions

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •