07-Nov-2016, 21:28
I've received my new Pro and, like most of you, I'm generally over enthusiastic about sound quality...
... except when I am not.
To tell a long story short, SQ is always great for non-classical music, it's great also for recent classical recordings, but it ranges from bad to appauling for less recent classical recordings. At least that's what I have found with my own record collection, bit perfect CD replicas using AIR 3.0, and with Qobuz CD quality (I have yet to try 24-bit recordings).
The older the recording, the more appauling the SQ.
Of course, I know that the older the recording, the lower the SQ in general. But here, I am not talking about recording studio acoustics or primitive recording technology or deteriorated tapes, but about decoding artifacts.
When it works, my Devialet feels like a perfect analog amp. But when I fed it with one of these recordings, it feels like a mumbo-jumbo of digital artifacts. Or a bad, pixelated digital amp.
Has anyone not see this as well? I am on 10.0.5.
... except when I am not.
To tell a long story short, SQ is always great for non-classical music, it's great also for recent classical recordings, but it ranges from bad to appauling for less recent classical recordings. At least that's what I have found with my own record collection, bit perfect CD replicas using AIR 3.0, and with Qobuz CD quality (I have yet to try 24-bit recordings).
The older the recording, the more appauling the SQ.
Of course, I know that the older the recording, the lower the SQ in general. But here, I am not talking about recording studio acoustics or primitive recording technology or deteriorated tapes, but about decoding artifacts.
When it works, my Devialet feels like a perfect analog amp. But when I fed it with one of these recordings, it feels like a mumbo-jumbo of digital artifacts. Or a bad, pixelated digital amp.
Has anyone not see this as well? I am on 10.0.5.
