- #111 [myml], 23-02-11 07:26
- #110 [fotheringay], 23-02-11 06:50So, the core of your argument is on value, nominal judgment rather than if it is about desirability, technical difference, personal choice of format and to some degree ignorance from age groups.
Perhaps you set a more rigorous title something like " 聽expensive and old黑膠唱片是傻瓜嗎? "
If your answer is still YES. My answer to you is still a NO. - #109 [myml], 23-02-11 04:31再一次, 不知道黑膠唱片是失真產物,不知道黑膠唱片相比CD的差距,聆聽黑膠唱片不是傻瓜。
但是如果明知道黑膠唱片是失真產物,明知黑膠唱片相比CD的差距,依然選擇使用大量金錢去聆聽黑膠唱片,是傻瓜嗎?我的回答是, 當然是傻瓜。。 -
- #108 [myml], 23-02-11 04:04reply #105
你以上的所謂論點我在互聯網看過無數次,一般的黑膠唱片支持者,特別是一些買賣二手黑膠唱片的小販都是這麼辯解,
當他們無言以對的時候,總會說黑膠唱片跟CD是不同產物,不能比較等等等等.. 為何這樣?皆因科技就是科技,
在常理下那有舊科技比新科技優勝?
這個貼子的重點是沒有人說聽黑膠唱片就是傻瓜, 貼子是聽黑膠唱片是傻瓜嗎? 這個是一個問號,是一個問題討論,
閣下中國語言不佳可能了解出現問題,這亦難怪..
我在YouTube看過你以數個名稱開設數個的頻道, 看到閣下的擺設, 是不可能以黑膠唱片和CD進行比較,
因此關於黑膠唱片好聲音還是CD好聲音,你的言論是沒有說服力的,
至於其他問題,你的所有論點都站不住腳, 還有,你沒有去比較又怎會知道誰優誰劣?你有去作過相同比較嗎?
最後修改時間: 2023-02-11 04:15:20 - #107 [DC273], 23-02-11 01:38世界有嘢唔會點老化喎、咁大个仔刀未听過
- #106 [DC273], 23-02-11 01:36精神兄有乜好拗吖、教色佢哋啦
- #105 [fotheringay], 23-02-11 00:31First of all it ain't matter who this EMI這個傢伙, he didn't conduct the research but Nimbus.
I know Nimbus is a very prestigious recording /record label in the history of UK sound engineering industry. They invented the Ambisonics recording technique which to many was years ahead of the idea of SACD. The idea is to give you essentially the attempt to reproduce sound as if it were being performed live.
Nimbus was famous for pressing high quality records for Decca and other labels. Their pressing on Ago, Decca , A&M and others are always sought after.
Furthermore, you had said it yourself "早期的製造CD事業技術可能不太成熟,至有一些不良產品出現", do you imply there are issue and reliability with CD's? What's the difference between LP's then? Some of my records are Shellac records from the 20's and with much care and the right needle they can still provide decent sound.
Let's be real you can't compare different technologies with the same standard. This is not scientific and not with the right platform. Would you say it's fair to compare the performance of a Ford Model T to a recent Mustang ?
I wouldn't even compare a first pressing from the 60's to a reissue from the 70's!!! They should be treated as two very different products.
Many had suggested that you started the thread with the wrong assumption and agenda in the first place. I am not speaking for other people here but my statements are not actually directly arguing your title but rather a trying to present a different perspective.
Moreover, you are trying not to prove yourself right but to prove other people wrong. Again, itself is fundamentally a fault with regards to your thread. - #104 [myml], 23-02-10 23:44reply#101
你真是笑死人 - #103 [myml], 23-02-10 23:40reply #101
你這個藏頭露尾之徒答不到問題就躲藏起來嗎? - #102 [myml], 23-02-10 23:36以上黑膠唱片我是1976年購買,CD是1986年購買,
我有超過200張CD是1990以前購買,此刻全部沒有任何損傷 - #101 [celestion], 23-02-10 23:30reply #100
傻人講傻話 - #100 [myml], 23-02-10 22:58reply#99
你給A spokesperson for EMI這個傢伙誤導了,
看來你不明白甚麼稱為CD, 讓我告訴你的真實情況罷,我擁有4000張(包括VCD, DVD,BLURAY)光碟,
有一些已經存放超過35年, 你提及到那個不知名的傢伙識少少,做代表,他提到的問題我現在逐一反駁..
1) 不要說一張弱小的CD,就算是不綉鋼,不好好保護,也會變質..
2) 早期的製造CD事業技術可能不太成熟,至有一些不良產品出現,但這是極少極少數,主要是一些買賣二手的小販把一些舊CD翻新才有那位扮代表的描述事件,另外一些CD-ROM 質素差,你買回來燒錄資料保存就不會長久,正常情形下,你要購買正版CD,才可以大幅避免以上事件發生,可明白否?? - #99 [fotheringay], 23-02-10 18:03CD's(including the CD, booklet and case) are prompt to sunlight and humidity.
If your CD's are stored in a damp environment the booklet may have mildew or even molds. If it gets in touch with the CD printing side molds may spread to the CD. It happens to me.
I could clean off the molds from the surface with aqueous based cleaning fluid but nothing I can do with those CDs suffered from molds eaten underneath the printings.
Some are ok to play but some not.
Also, some CD's look clean and no scratch from the silver side(the playing side) but still jumping. Most of the time it's to do with the damage to the printing side.
And I quote from EMI;
" — A spokesperson for EMI, commenting on research done on the permanence of compact discs by the record label Nimbus in 1988. Nimbus, the first CD manufacturer in the UK, said that it had done some research into the disc rot issue and found that most discs will self-destruct after between eight and 10 years. The company's findings, which went against prevailing theories of the time that CDs were indestructible, blamed the problems on improper dyes that reduced the quality of the discs. As highlighted by the quote, record companies were at first skeptical, but Nimbus' concerns about disc integrity turned out to be important and true."
- #98 [myml], 23-02-10 11:47reply #97
( the hardware(CD materials themselves) may not be able to. )
為何如此,可否說明? - #97 [fotheringay], 23-02-10 08:23
That's good. Make sure it will last.
The 1.0.1.0. may last forever but the hardware(CD materials themselves) may not be able to.
I.O.I.O..............
最後修改時間: 2023-02-10 08:27:14 - #96 [myml], 23-02-10 07:58reply#95
最低限度,我現在的可愛CD是沒有問題 - #95 [fotheringay], 23-02-10 06:51Houses will get older and deteriorated.
Cars will get older, less efficient and even need yearly service and parts replacements to keep it running.
Clothes from designer labels cost hundred times more than from Primark but last more or less the same time.
£400 a bottle of red wine tastes the same to me from a £8 one which can be bought in local supermarket.
Believe or not, CD's also get fungus and scratches and deemed unusable.
Are we all fools?
最後修改時間: 2023-02-10 06:52:46 - #94 [myml], 23-02-10 05:08今天有空去清潔一些舊黑膠唱片,怎知道弄了數分鐘,黑膠唱片掉下一小片出來,看清楚後,
發覺可能是以前曾掉過地上加上黑膠唱片老化,想當年購買黑膠唱片,今天又做了傻瓜.. - #93 [myml], 23-02-03 03:10reply #92
相信你也用了不少時間尋找資料,我不是甚麼專業人士,亦只是查看互聯網,擁有黑膠唱片及CD 在家中作對比,
才得出結論,既然你有這方面興趣,大家不妨研究一下..
原始聲音經過錄音系統再次播放出來亦可能會失真,問題在於製成品後那樣失真較多,這個就是重點, - #92 [calbee1128], 23-02-03 01:16
取樣頻率,學名Sample Frequency,意是將音響「切粒」的每秒粒數。44.1KHz 的 CD 取樣頻率,即是 CD 碟的數碼「樣本化」規格,是每秒鐘將音響切成 44,100 粒,每粒謂之一個樣本(Sample)。
由此推算,16bit/44.1kHz取樣的每秒鐘脈衝流量,便是 16 x 44,100 x 2(聲道)= 1,411,200bits/sec。而 16bit 字每秒鐘能夠提供 216 = 65,536 級不同的電平變化。
這每秒一百四十多萬字長(Word Length)的脈衝,印在 12cm 直徑的銀面金屬片上(也有金面),用鐳射管拾訊方式檢定 0 或 1 脈衝,鐳射管由碟內周開始閱讀「進入」資料(access data),碟的轉速是由內圍的 500rpm 經由伺服控制遞減至圓邊的 200rpm,讓鐳射管在恆速(Constant Speed)狀態下每秒鐘閱讀同樣距離、同樣數量的資訊;鐳射光射在 CD 表面上,將 0 與 1 的資訊反射至一面集訊鏡上,閱讀工作便告完成。
反射鏡所搜集到的資訊,理論上是應該 100% 與印在 CD 上的毫無分別。而印在碟上的東西又應 100% 和印版毫無分別……如此引申至和被切粒(量子化)之前的音源 100% 毫無分別。可惜事實上絕非如此,無論 Analog 或 Digital 軟件,其最終階段成品必然產生失真。Analog 失真是波形之各式畸變,Digital 失真是脈衝訊號之失落。前者聽在耳朶裏是有失真的音響,而後者却無法令到 D > A 解碼器正常操作,還原為「一條條」的 Analog 聲響。 - 下一頁 (2 of 7)
- 返回 ...
1) 從你的言論及影片,相信你只是一名人云亦云的音響發燒友貨色,
因為你根本沒有作出過黑膠唱碟與CD對比就出來發表意見,
你個人認為黑膠唱碟比CD優勝是沒有問題,但不要在公共場所發佈這些言論,
如要發佈,請拿出堅實資料。。
2) (Perhaps you set a more rigorous title something like " 聽expensive and old黑膠唱片是傻瓜嗎? "
If your answer is still YES. My answer to you is still a NO.)
以上這個問題是由閣下的口中出來,沒有人這麼說,是你自說自話
最後修改時間: 2023-02-11 07:28:40