[gluteus maximus]

Originally Posted by squash54

Hi GM, thanks for the link.

I found a Cambridge CD player using Anagram's Q5 upsampling technology as well as a "plain english" explanation (obviously written by Anagram) of what it does and the benefits it delivers for the listener.

Cambridge Audio 840C CD Player - CD Players - CAMB840C

I expect with a bit more searching I should be able to turn up a subjective A/B comparison test of CD players with and without this technology.

Actually, I have sort of lost interest in this end of the hi-fi audio scene (I mean the CD player/pre-amp/power amp end) in favour of the loudspeaker and frequency cross-over end. I have a reasonable player (it does DVD-A and SACD and just about everything else), AV processor and multiple power amps with lots of 'head-room'. However, my experience has been you get a bigger bang for your buck with "improvements" at the loudspeaker end of the sound reproduction process and it's something I can DIY, to a large extent.

I have noticed that the price of these 'top end' players seems to be coming down significantly so I might make a visit to a few of the better audio retailers in the near future and have a listen to a few.

Regards,

Squash

Hi squash54

That kind of upsampling seems to be quite accepted in the CD player world; I was wondering whether the same signal processing technology applied to mp3s would result in a perceived improvement in sound quality. All I found were forum posts along the lines of "Oh yes it does"/"Oh no it doesn't" rather than anything authoritative. If you come across anything more, do please post it.

gm

[squash54]

Originally Posted by gluteus maximus

Hi squash54

That kind of upsampling seems to be quite accepted in the CD player world; I was wondering whether the same signal processing technology applied to mp3s would result in a perceived improvement in sound quality. All I found were forum posts along the lines of "Oh yes it does"/"Oh no it doesn't" rather than anything authoritative. If you come across anything more, do please post it.

gm

Good idea! As soon as I get a chance I will email the the tech people at Anagram and ask whether they have any comments/references on that topic.

Squash

[Nightfly]

Originally Posted by antonym2m2

SQUASH .54

What's with the attitude.

I'm entitled to edit my post if i want too...that's why the facility's there isn't it ?

furthermore, i can't be expected to immediately respond to your particular question just because you expect it there and then. Some of us don't sit around all day waiting for people to comment

What sort of a forum participant are you, demanding explanations and responses that suit you.

"That's not how we do thing round here"...Blimey !!.

If you expect people to answer your comments immediately perhaps you should obtain their private mobile numbers first.

I would have loved to explain about audio editing programs but you need to be less hostile and more patient

Ok calm down ....Squash did not request a immediate response...nor do
I believe his post was hostile....he was just referring to when you edit your post it doesn't make sense to the future postings in the thread when a response is rendered...
But you are right, you are entitled to edit your post..No one here expects a immediate
response either, we are from different countries and go to sleep at different times.There are many that can answer the same question.

Please settle down and have a good time here and try not to take things
personally.

Thanks,

[Nightfly]

Originally Posted by squash54

Hmm! I think I will just let a forum moderator apply their wisdom to what is appropriate editing where the effect may be to distort subsequent posts.

Cue, Nightfly or Solaris.

Thank you Squash...

[rolly]

When you do that it makes part of my post incomprehesible

Which part?

[squash54]

Originally Posted by rolly

Which part?

Thanks Rolly

[rolly]

His question made perfect sense.

Yes,the question did make sense,but I was wondering myself why it was asked in the context it was used when I first read it in your thread.
After reading the entire thread I figured out what was going on,and then concluded squash54 did have a good point,and I think you just took it the wrong way.

The question squash54 asked kinda looked stupid and out of place without a reason to refer to when you edited your post.
That is why I asked "Which part"?
I already knew which part,same as everybody does now,and was trying to make light of this with some humor by poking fun on squash54.
That is all in good fun.

I'd still like to read the answer to the question that seemed misfitting at the time,
"what audio editing programme allows you to "improve" sound quality that is not already there?"
I'd be very curious as to how you can get something from nothing.
Note,that is not a wisecrack.That is an honest inquiry.

[squash54]

Originally Posted by antonym2m2

squash54 got upset about a post that i edited....i edited it to make the point i was making less complicated.

squash54 asked a question connected to the pre-edited post which he says made his later post look unintelligible. It didn't. The quote that he used was shown in it's pre-edited form ! His question made perfect sense.

As i didn't respond to his question quickly enough, he suggested the administrator back him up about my lack of forum etiquette.

Only after i returned to the boards the next day did i notice his remarks

After answering his second question about the Gary Numan eye icon..he returns a rather barbed response that Gary Numan sufferers from Asperg Syndrome resulting in communicating difficulties.....that was unnecessary.

I hope i can contribute to the forum as i use a lot of the sevices other forum user use....we can help each other out.

There is a LOT I could say about the form and content of your posts on this thread but haven't because you are a newbie and most of us take a bit of time to find our feet, as it were.

However, implicit in the part of your post that I have highlighted is an accusation that I "suggested" that a Mod "back me up" and , worse, that Nightfly acceded to this suggestion. Both statements are patently false but I am particularly aggrieved at the slur directed at the gentleman (in every sense of the word) that moderates this forum.

THINK about it!!!

[squash54]

Originally Posted by rolly

Yes,the question did make sense,but I was wondering myself why it was asked in the context it was used when I first read it in your thread.
After reading the entire thread I figured out what was going on,and then concluded squash54 did have a good point,and I think you just took it the wrong way.

The question squash54 asked kinda looked stupid and out of place without a reason to refer to when you edited your post.
That is why I asked "Which part"?
I already knew which part,same as everybody does now,and was trying to make light of this with some humor by poking fun on squash54.
That is all in good fun.

I'd still like to read the answer to the question that seemed misfitting at the time,
"what audio editing programme allows you to "improve" sound quality that is not already there?"
I'd be very curious as to how you can get something from nothing.
Note,that is not a wisecrack.That is an honest inquiry.

GM raised an interesting point about the "upsampling" technology being used in some CD players and noted that there is not much out there about whether this can be applied to mp3's. I am hoping to get some feed-back about this issue from the Swiss company that provides this technology to CD player manufacturers. I will post anything I learn here.

[Nightfly]

Originally Posted by squash54

There is a LOT I could say about the form and content of your posts on this thread but haven't because you are a newbie and most of us take a bit of time to find our feet, as it were.

However, implicit in the part of your post that I have highlighted is an accusation that I "suggested" that a Mod "back me up" and , worse, that Nightfly acceded to this suggestion. Both statements are patently false but I am particularly aggrieved at the slur directed at the gentleman (in every sense of the word) that moderates this forum.

THINK about it!!!

Squash,

I did not back you up as you know, but I responded to you as a Senior Member making a query.I happened to agree with you in this instance but you know if I didn't I would say so as well..The new member must understand it's not his opinion that counts on "what's fine" and how to use the forum,
but mine...that's what I'm here for.

The Gary Newman stuff was a little over the top and we shouldn't attack a another member persoanally..but you know that..

Basically we should all respect each others difference of opinions and
take a little helpful constructive criticism from others.But that will
take trust, and that must me earned in any relationship.

Squash thank-you for calling me a gentleman(it's been a long time)....

and your trust my friend has certainly been earned.

and antonym2m2 if you have something to say to me please
address me directly, and let's consider this closed,
as you said: continue to contribute to the forum