Re: Music Servers VS Excellent Transports?

by mugenfoo on Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:03 am

Don't forget, that OS based players such as Amarra, Fidelia and even the so called Bit-Perfect are not really bit perfect (not that this is better or worse, but just different!). They perform some fancy signal processing on the raw data by adding noise-shaping and also other digital filtering techniques (check out "iZotope" as a particular example).

And anytime each of these software players resample or upsample, definitely some form of digital interpolation & filtering come into play already.

Whereas a pure CD transport will just output the raw SPDIF into the DAC, as it was stamped on the silver redbook disc.

So its never an apple to apple comparison between a CAS playback vs a CD-Trasport playback.

There are too many variables at play here and not just a matter of whether which machine has a clock that 10000000000x lower jitter than whatever.

Fundamentals of digital playback:

1. Must have accurate timing (jitter issue)
2. Must have accurate conversion (what bits becomes what analog voltage)
3. FILTERING methodology.

Comparison between CAS & traditional transport really just boils down to a matter of personal preference. Much like the comparison between two phono cartridges. As usual, the laws of economics would hold water ... the more $$$ that went into its design & development, the more superior it would be (provided its not some scam-job like a Goldmund DVD player or the Theta Transports and the like...) .

Spoiler:: http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/Goldmund/goldmundizator.html

by jokiarch on Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:19 am

carz wrote:
Joki,

Did you try connecting the TAD600 (using it as a CD transport) to the BDA-1 ? And connecting the BDP-1 to the TAD600 (using it as a DAC) ? Was wondering if it was the TAD600 Transport section OR DAC section that won the day ?

Hi Carz,

Yes, I did connect BDP-1 into TAD600, using its onboard dac, and the strength of the TAD which I perceived earlier on its own, was retained. In fact, I can detect slight improvement in sound that contribute to better dimensionality. I suspect it has extraordinary dac section that is making it very special.

But it is obvious that this rather special player only belongs to special riches that I could never be no matter how hard I try.

Jo Ki

PS. thank you for such sane question, which exudes your sincerity.

by **WongKN** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:07 pm

Ah... I see I have managed to invoke a healthy and very good discussion on the definition of CAS. I have often said how I tend to see things just a tiny bit differently from others and later I will put in my 2 sen worth. I actually think the term CAS can be misleading as it is really not so much whether a computer is used but how the digital music is played. Perhaps forumers might like to discuss further and agree on what is and is not CAS before i stir the shitpot with my own ideas ? Laughing

by DrWho on Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:28 pm

jokiarch wrote:
elhefe wrote:
WongKN wrote:Actually the topic of this thread has been debated many times before. And it is clear it will continue to be debate many times in the future.

Before you guys progress further, I suggest that you guys come to an agreement on the definition of CAS. I.e. exactly what constitutes CAS digital playback. I think I can see different takes on this in this thread.

Isnt it self explanatory ? CAS is COMPUTER audio system. so it must be running on a computer. if no computer is involved e.g. digital files on hard disk + digital player, then its not CAS.

Good point! Perhaps we should all rephrase it and substitute "CAS" to digital music files playback system?

The giss of the matter is the digital music file stored in hard disc or flash drive; not about the computer irrespective of whatever name it is...

Another way of differentiating the CAS devices is to classify them as Portable Computer and Music Server. This is to differentiate between the general purpose computer/entry level device, eg Mac Mini and the dedicated music server, eg Bryston. As correctly pointed out by Joki, these two are different animals, designed for different purposes but used to perform the same function. It is quite easy for a CD system to outperform a Window based lap top but not so easy to outperform a Bryston.

by carz on Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:13 pm

jokiarch wrote:
carz wrote:
Joki,

Did you try connecting the TAD600 (using it as a CD transport) to the BDA-1 ? And connecting the BDP-1 to the TAD600 (using it as a DAC) ? Was wondering if it was the TAD600 Transport section OR DAC section that won the day ?

Hi Carz,

Yes, I did connect BDP-1 into TAD600, using its onboard dac, and the strength of the TAD which I perceived earlier on its own, was retained. In fact, I can detect slight improvement in sound that contribute to better dimensionality. I suspect it has extraordinary dac section that is making it very special.

But it is obvious that this rather special player only belongs to special riches that I could never be no matter how hard I try.

Jo Ki

PS. thank you for such sane question, which exudes your sincerity.

Thanks for the reply. Ever so curious as to what makes the megabucks TAD600 tick, and learning from where their strengths are. Insanely expensive, you are right.

Which means that the Bryston BDP-1 beats the TAD600 transport ever so slightly. And you are comparing CD (16/44.1) with ripped 16/44.1.

The TAD-D600 DAC must be really good, especially the analog stage

by dixchen on Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:02 pm

mugenfoo wrote:Don't forget, that OS based players such as Amarra, Fidelia and even the so called Bit-Perfect are not really bit perfect (not that this is better or worse, but just different!). They perform some fancy signal processing on the raw data by adding noise-shaping and also other digital filtering techniques (check out "iZotope" as a particular example).

And anytime each of these software players resample or upsample, definitely some form of digital interpolation & filtering come into play already.

Whereas a pure CD transport will just output the raw SPDIF into the DAC, as it was stamped on the silver redbook disc.

So its never an apple to apple comparison between a CAS playback vs a CD-Trasport playback.

There are too many variables at play here and not just a matter of whether which machine has a clock that 10000000000x lower jitter than whatever.

Fundamentals of digital playback:

1. Must have accurate timing (jitter issue)
2. Must have accurate conversion (what bits becomes what analog voltage)
3. FILTERING methodology.

Comparison between CAS & traditional transport really just boils down to a matter of personal preference. Much like the comparison between two phono cartridges. As usual, the laws of economics would hold water ... the more $$$ that went into its design & development, the more superior it would be (provided its not some scam-job like a Goldmund DVD player or the Theta Transports and the like...) .
Spoiler:

http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/Goldmund/goldmundizator.html

16/44.1 in CAS compared to silver discs at 16/44.1 is not an apple to apple comparison meh... Razz

by sflam on Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:23 pm

dr who wrote:

Another way of differentiating the CAS devices is to classify them as Portable Computer and Music Server. This is to differentiate between the general purpose computer/entry level device, eg Mac Mini and the dedicated music server, eg Bryston. As correctly pointed out by Joki, these two are different animals, designed for different purposes but used to perform the same function. It is quite easy for a CD system to outperform a Window based lap top but not so easy to outperform a Bryston.

1) many servers - even the bryston - are nothing more than souped-up computers using computer motherboards, power supplies (improved and filtered) and sound cards (modified).

2) if someone builds a computer using a fanless design, the best sound card, solid state memory and the best motherboard and installs linux to play only music, would that be a computer or a music server? essentially the bryston is a fanless, silent computer and it uses linux os.

i still think classifying digital audio systems according to file storage - optical or non-optical is a viable solution.

by sflam on Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:27 pm

carz wrote:
If that's the case, then if you pair the BDP-1 with an incredible DAC (as good as that on the TAD-D600), you can have the best of both worlds and save some megabucks.

it's all about matching. the bryston player and dac combo sounds very good. however, the bryston player with some super-duper dac may not sound good.

by carz on Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:37 pm

sflam,

I wonder what is the science involved in the matching of Digital Transport to DAC.

The science should be more exact compared to analog matching where there are more known and unknown variables, right ?

by sflam on Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:49 pm

carz,
i honestly do not know. perhaps the computer expert wongkn can help out...

by DrWho on Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:14 pm

sflam wrote:
dr who wrote:

Another way of differentiating the CAS devices is to classify them as Portable Computer and Music Server. This is to differentiate between the general purpose computer/entry level device, eg Mac Mini and the dedicated music server, eg Bryston. As correctly pointed out by Joki, these two are different animals, designed for different purposes but used to perform the same function. It is quite easy for a CD system to outperform a Window based lap top but not so easy to outperform a Bryston.

1) many servers - even the bryston - are nothing more than souped-up computers using computer motherboards, power supplies (improved and filtered) and sound cards (modified).

2) if someone builds a computer using a fanless design, the best sound card and the best motherboard and installs linux to play only music, would that be a computer or a music server? essentially the bryston is a fanless, silent computer and it uses linux os.

i still think classifying digital audio systems according to file storage - optical or non-optical is a viable solution.

On the contrary, Bryston is not a souped up computer but a striped down computer with only a single purpose. You can't install any apps to it and it just behave like a server. Most of the time it needs a client to tell it what to do. The read only RAM size of the Auraliti is less than 500kB and Bryston's should be of similar size. This contain all the OS/programs for the device to function. No other function to perform. Even though it is basically a computer it is more correctly to be called a server.
Your second point, if the server is loaded with with only linux OS/program to play and act as a server, then it is a server. If it is loaded with an full OS then it would be considered as a computer.
The device should be termed as how it is programed to be, as a server or a computer which can perform other functions apart from playing music files.
Classifying them as optical or non optical is only setting apart the CD and CAS but not addressing the difference in CAS, ie differentiating the all purpose computer and the dedicated computer (server). I believe that was the original intention posted earlier.

by **elhefe** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:29 pm

WongKN wrote:Ah... I see I have managed to invoke a healthy and very good discussion on the definition of CAS. I have often said how I tend to see things just a tiny bit differently from others and later I will put in my 2 sen worth. I actually think the term CAS can be misleading as it is really not so much whether a computer is used but how the digital music is played. Perhaps forumers might like to discuss further and agree on what is and is not CAS before i stir the shitpot with my own ideas ?

How long do we have to wait before you open up the ultimate can of worms??? Smile

by sflam on Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:23 pm

wongkn,

b4 u open yr can of worms...

1) can we agree that we can categorise cd/cd-transport and cas by file storage method i.e. optical and non-optical?

2) under cas, can we then classify the sub-categories of computer/laptop and server/media player by os/function? i.e. a computer with os that can perform all functions like word processing, imaging, spread sheet, games, etc, should be called a 'computer' while a computer with os that performs only one function - play music - should be called a server/media player?

by DrWho on Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:30 pm

60+ replies and about 1000 views in less than 1.5 day since the thread started, must be a HiFi4Sale record. Chilli padi Hot! Very Happy

by mugenfoo on Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:50 pm

dixchen wrote:
mugenfoo wrote:Don't forget, that OS based players such as Amarra, Fidelia and even the so called Bit-Perfect are not really bit perfect (not that this is better or worse, but just different!). They perform some fancy signal processing on the raw data by adding noise-shaping and also other digital filtering techniques (check out "iZotope" as a particular example).

And anytime each of these software players resample or upsample, definitely some form of digital interpolation & filtering come into play already.

Whereas a pure CD transport will just output the raw SPDIF into the DAC, as it was stamped on the silver redbook disc.

So its never an apple to apple comparison between a CAS playback vs a CD-Trasport playback.

There are too many variables at play here and not just a matter of whether which machine has a clock that 10000000000x lower jitter than whatever.

Fundamentals of digital playback:

1. Must have accurate timing (jitter issue)
2. Must have accurate conversion (what bits becomes what analog voltage)
3. FILTERING methodology.

Comparison between CAS & traditional transport really just boils down to a matter of personal preference. Much like the comparison between two phono cartridges. As usual, the laws of economics would hold water ... the more $$$ that went into its design & development, the more superior it would be (provided its not some scam-job like a Goldmund DVD player or the Theta Transports and the like...) .
Spoiler:

http://lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/Goldmund/goldmundizator.html

16/44.1 in CAS compared to silver discs at 16/44.1 is not an apple to apple comparison meh...

its not ... because although the source file or disc may be 16/44.1, but when a CAS software outputs its bits to a DAC, its has performed some processing to the signal already. (ie, noise dithering). Even more so if it gets resampled or processed by the core audio components of the OS.

This is referring strictly to those "Computer audiophile" music playback software.

by dixchen on Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:16 pm

Aah... understood...

Thanks mate...

by **WongKN** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:27 pm

DrWho wrote:60+ replies and about 1000 views in less than 1.5 day since the thread started, must be a HiFi4Sale record. Chilli padi Hot!

And note that all posts were courteous and to the point. There were no name calling, no attacks, etc. Now this is what all H4S threads should be like eh ? Very Happy

by **elhefe** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:46 pm

WongKN wrote:
DrWho wrote:60+ replies and about 1000 views in less than 1.5 day since the thread started, must be a HiFi4Sale record. Chilli padi Hot!

And note that all posts were courteous and to the point. There were no name calling, no attacks, etc. Now this is what all H4S threads should be like eh ?

Worms,Worms,Worms,Worms,Worms,Worms.....spill it out..

by sflam on Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:49 pm

wongkn wrote:

And note that all posts were courteous and to the point. There were no name calling, no attacks, etc.

hello, if u don't open yr can of worms soon, the mood may change Razz

by **WongKN** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:08 pm

I work in the I/T industry and have been fortunate to be considered a kind of 'expert' by my customers in my area of specialty (Online transaction processing, in particular CICS and some Websphere softwares for those who are curious). But it will not apply to the topic at hand. I am no expert here. However, what I will admit to is that due to my background, I tend to see things a little bit differently.

Here is my attempt at shit-stirring but trying to be brief at the same time.

Basically I do not have a firm personal definition of what constitutes CAS and what does not and feels it is not important. But rather I see it as from how the music is stored.

When digital music was first invented, by Phillips and Sony back in the 1990s, they created the so-called Redbook CD format. In this form, music is stored/ represented digitally in this RBCD format. The resolution was decided to be 16/44.1. The music was stored in a certain format but which cannot be stored logically on our normal computers. The distribution medium was chosen to be optical disc.

Later attempts at 'high-resolution' audio (basically 24/96 but also higher) led Sony and others to create the SACD and DVD-Audio standard.

In parallel, in the I/T world, especially the home computing world, multimedia started to be developed. Along with the development of multimedia came the need to store pictures, music, video in digital form on our home computers. This led to some sort of parallel development to the commercial world (against CD, DVD, etc) in particular for music and video storage. From multimedia, we got formats and file types such as WAV, ALAC, JPG, FLAC, etc.

Incidentally, one can clearly see the difference between the home I/T and a proper professional approach because Sony and Phillips created only 1 standard - RBCD for music while in the home I/T world, we have multitude of standards - WAV, FLAC, ALAC, and so forth. This is how things work in the home and often even professional I/T world, different people tend to come out with their own standard.

Strictly speaking, if we want to be dogmatic, CAS can perhsps be associated with the playing of music stored in one of the formats/standards that came out of the development of multimedia. Because files types like WAV and ALAC was created from the I/T multimedia world, thus they tend to need O/S like windows or Linux and running specialized programs to play them.

Playing music files on a general purpose O/S entails quite a bit of compromises as MF have tried to explain a few times now. Basically the O/S was designed to run generic programs, not optimized for music and so forth. M2Tech for e.g. complains about the kernel mixer in Windows which intercepts the audio stream in DS (direct sound) mode and processes it before sending it out. This is what things like the M2Tech Kernel streaming mode tries to avoid, and I believe what the Mac OS bit-perfect mode too.

Playing from a CD as source has an inherent weakness and that it the optical reading process is prone to problems. A CD is very susceptible to contamination from finger prints and other junk on its reading surface and when the laser head reads the CD through air, there is also risk of interference, no matter how minute, from dust in the air. By comparison, the storage and retrevial of data (our music in this case) is much more secure and robust in computers, via HDD, SSD, and so forth.

Because a CD is not stored in a format compatible with computers (rather -home- computers) when we want to transfer the contents of the CD to our computers, we must 'rip' it. The ripping process basically converts the format into one of the multimedia formats, usually WAV, or FLAC (quite popular now), or ALAC, etc. So the process of ripping a CD converts the music source to computer based. I am not sure if you would want to now associate this as 'CAS'. I.e. as argued by people like sflam, playing off a CD is not CAS, playing off a computer based storage is CAS.

The issue of resolution, e.g. 16/44.1, then higher rez like 24/96, etc, is basically a different issue altogether.

I wonder if I have stirred the pot quite nicely now... Very Happy

by **elhefe** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:19 pm

Nice, warm and browny shit it is hahahaha

by tycham on Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:00 pm

MSB Technology now have this very accurate clock measured in unprecedented femtosecond. Cost I think is USD9K+.

by VS126 on Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:04 pm

mugenfoo wrote:after all these debate... does it really bring anyone closer to enjoying their music ? If it does, good for you. If it didn't, well, next time can try and consider the time being spent to spin some vinyl or CD or stream some bits instead .... After all at the end of the day, what really matters is Only the Music.

Well said Mugen.

I find it quite amusing how you guys define the format as if it makes any difference to the enjoyment of music.

And some one profess to be the experts and 'knowall' of all things digital ..

Cheers

by **WongKN** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:49 pm

VS126,

Don't spoil this thread please. Everyone has been courteous and have avoided name calling and insinuation. At least forumers here have attempted to share openly and honestly. So don't start it. You know you are not welcomed to do so.

You also seem to be having some problems. Hallucinations perhaps ? Quoting a non-existent post ? Very Happy

(MF have deleted it).

by **bassraptor** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:18 pm

I just spent an hour mounting a Sumiko blue point no 2 cartridge on a pro-ject 6perspex TT ...all that time to get alignment n other stuff as close to right as I can. Fun. Had the Linn majik streaming some music to keep me going. Suddenly I heard Dave brubeck's time out, flac file, uncompressed. My first thought - damn, that's one fine bit of vinyl! Then I realized what I was thinking ... Rolling Eyes

... Guess I'll just enjoy the music ...

by **WongKN** on Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:33 pm

'Enjoy the music'.

This is a phrase many of us have used before, myself included. Many a times it was used to stir some shit. I know I have done it before. But the truth is that all of us here enjoys our music. That is what keeps us in this hobby. That is what keeps us on our never ending quest to upgrade our system. So that we can enjoy our music even better, even more.

But there is a risk of overusing the phrase. One forumer in the past pointed out so succintly, if music is all that is important, why not just listen to a transistor radio or a mini-compo ? By spending time and money on the hobby, by definition one has already sidelined the music to an extent. Every second checking the internet for the next best upgrade is a second wasted NOT enjoying the music. Every time a component is upgraded, the enjoyment of the music is degraded as the component now needs to run in before delivering its best. The best equipment can take upwards of 50 to even 100 hours before delivering its best sound and by direct inference, best enjoyment of the music. By direct inference, this means up to 100 hours WASTED NOT enjoying the music. Why even go for teh-tarik with friends ? Waste of time what ? Should be home, alone, enjoying the music.

Everyone here enjoys our music. But many also wants to expand the horizon of the hobby - to share opinions and tok-kok with like minded people who are also passionate about their music. If enjoying the music is so important, then why come to this forum and why post ? Aren't one neglecting the music by doing that - wasting time in this forum instead ? Don't that very act directly mean NOT enjoying the music ? Why not be a total hermit, keeping oneself in the hifi room playing music every single free second of the day, ignoring everyone and everything else ? And for every single other second, wear a headphone with music. And when sleeping, also have the system playing ?

There is a limit to everything.

Food for thought and more shit being stirred ! Laughing

by david&david on Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:58 am

Enjoy the Music
I guess why I 'enjoy the music' is probably my 'system' is setup in such
a way that it let's me enjoy 'it'. Maybe that is why I come here, to read,
understand, on how is it possible for me to improve things so that I
can 'enjoy my music' more? To experience the 'emotional' aspect of a
certain vocal rendition, to 'do the air guitar' during a rocking good
solo, to listen to a 'goose bump' inducing Firebird Suite?
I use to be 'not well to do' (I guess I still am Crying or Very sad

), the days when a humble old radio use to be my music companion. Listening to the hits like Bob Seger & the Silver Bullet Band, Blondie, Kansas, Journey, the Who etc....wakes me up everyday. Then I discovered the JVC mini compo!!!! Fleetwood Mac, the Eagles, Tom Petty, Rickie Lee Jones sounded great!!!
Then due to work commitments, had to move to another city, got myself a Sony Walkman!!! Moody Blues, Hall & Oates, Led Zep, Lennon, McCartney 1, McCartney 2! Not only it's in my head, it's in my bones, it's in my blood!
And so, on and on it went until today, where I have got myself a 'proper' system (but still very 'not well to do'). My point is, people change, 'upgrade'. Be it their system, life expectations, music maturity (I use to like ABBA, gawd).
I still enjoy the music I mentioned before and probably even more so, maybe due to the fact I'm hearing 'more'? Yeah I'm into 'hifi' because I want to hear more of my beloved music, I'm not 'young' but I still want to experience emotions, that air guitar thingy, have goose bumps etc.
Hifi is a hobby to me (to most?). Politics is for work(?) and politicians. I come here to enjoy. I do this to be happy. It's 'nice' to be passionate about ones hobby and it's also 'nice' to come here and discuss and learn. Music, hifi & friends are important (so is vinyl Very Happy

)
If vinyl, sacd, radio, CAS or even cassette can make me young at heart again, count me in.
Late nights make write stuff like this Laughing

PS- I still like ABBA, gawd!

by mugenfoo on Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:07 am

WongKN wrote:

You also seem to be having some problems. Hallucinations perhaps ? Quoting a non-existent post ? (MF have deleted it).

Call it .. "The Ghost in the Machine" !

lol!

by WongKK on Wed Oct 19, 2011 7:37 am

WongKN wrote:But there is a risk of overusing the phrase. One forumer in the past pointed out so succintly, if music is all that is important, why not just listen to a transistor radio or a mini-compo ?

Funny you should say that. I am in my office right now doing some work but with a Beethoven piano sonata playing on Youtube through my computer speakers. I am really enjoying it Smile

by mugenfoo on Wed Oct 19, 2011 8:43 am

WongKK wrote:
WongKN wrote:But there is a risk of overusing the phrase. One forumer in the past pointed out so succintly, if music is all that is important, why not just listen to a transistor radio or a mini-compo ?

Funny you should say that. I am in my office right now doing some work but with a Beethoven piano sonata playing on Youtube through my computer speakers. I am really enjoying it

by **bassraptor** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:16 am

Well, don't forget, many of us picked up an appreciatation for music listening to the radio. At least, I did in the 1960s, with a small transistor radio, graduating to a bigger radio in the 70s, a cassette player/radio in the early 80s and then a mini-compo with an onboard TT in the mid-80s. Then, I delved into hi-fi ... imagine, 25 years later, I could still have been listening to music on radio and midi system and loving it! With lots of money invested in property, plus a VW golf or two. No, instead, I delved into hi-fi ... clown

... on the plus side, I did learn how to play an instrument or two, even if with limited skills, because I loved music

off to Starhill shortly to attend some Steinway Lyngdorf launch ... sigh ...anyone want to meet me in Sg Wang for lunch? We could raid CMY or victoria music ....

by mugenfoo on Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:18 am

Bassie, today's the media launch for VW Passat, Jetta & Cross-Touran !

Maybe time to go check out your potential VW ride instead and give all these hifi-mm (mental m**turb*tion) a rest... Razz

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:18 am

mugenfoo wrote:
WongKN wrote:

You also seem to be having some problems. Hallucinations perhaps ? Quoting a non-existent post ? (MF have deleted it).

Call it .. "The Ghost in the Machine" !

Ah... i-Robot... Laughing

by **elhefe** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:26 am

I-robot cleaning the shit:)

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:00 am

MM eh ?... I remember we used to call the 'M' 'shooting aeroplane' back in my younger days. So MM would now be called 'shooting aeroplane in the mind', I suppose ? lol!

I started off with a portable tape recorder. Used to envy my friends who could afford mini-compos. I remember how tight money was back when I was studying. The prices of hifi is really obscene nowadays.

Youtube, radio in the car, music coming through a cheap system; it's very nice how sometimes we can just forget all these seriousness and lose ourselves in the music, carefreely enjoying the music. One of my favourite youtube clip is a duet between Teresa Teng and Paula Tsui. Very Happy

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:03 am

Actually I am guilty of not fully enjoying the music as much as all of you guys. Every week I spend hours in the company of my friends, fellow hifi freaks, talking all sort of nonsense and generally enjoying each other's company. By the logic of 'just enjoy the music', we were wasting our time because we should all be home alone listening to the system. But there we are, every week almost without fail, talking cock for hours.

To me, the passion of hifi encompasses more than just the mere act of listening to the music.

So, guilty as charged ! lol!

by adrian4454 on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:17 am

I still got my 10++ years old Sony tuner connected to Outside antenna to make music as hi fi as possible..

Music enjoyment come greatest when fidelity of playback is very good. Enjoying the music that u love.. I still manage to sing along from my beaten car radio, doing highspeed at highway.. where I can barely hear the singer or even the instrument~

Again I still stand by my own term of "Music matter, only when the equipment is decent enough", and I am an Audiophile that love listen to equipment, cable, tweak, and fuses sometimes Smile

haha~

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:52 pm

DEI, I just realised you guys still have not come to an agreement of what you want to define as CAS or non-CAS. I put in some good time writing that long post you know. Shit stirring is tiring stuff. Show some respect and come to an agreement la ! lol!

by mugenfoo on Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:59 pm

OK, lets be creative on what CAS means:

1) Cannot-Anyhow-Shout
2) Can-Always-Sing
3) C**k-A**-Sh!t.
4).....

by adrian4454 on Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:30 pm

1) Cannot-Anyhow-Shout
2) Can-Always-Sing
3) C**k-A**-Sh!t.
4) Carrot And Stick
5) Cannot Attack Submarine
6) non Collected Ayam Soup
7)....

Haha..

by sflam on Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:47 pm

cas =

cannot always shit =

constipation and suffering Razz

by **htkaki** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:49 pm

1) Cannot-Anyhow-Shout
2) Can-Always-Sing
3) C**k-A**-Sh!t.
4) Carrot And Stick
5) Cannot Attack Submarine
6) non Collected Ayam Soup
7) Common Argument Scenario

by tycham on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:09 pm

htkaki wrote:

7) Common Argument Scenario

I like this...

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:13 pm

OK, I think we have a winner here then.

CAS = Conman Arguement Scenario !!!

All who agree put your legs up (the proper leg please). Those who disagree, you are mis-informed. Get out of the room and you can only listen to MP3s from now on.....

by **htkaki** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:19 pm

At this time of hour especially after a hard day work, do you think many of us here still can put up the 'improper' leg? Twisted Evil

by **WongKN** on Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:22 pm

When we are horny enough... well, you are an 'experienced' man, what do you think ? Laughing

by mugenfoo on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:24 am

WongKN wrote:OK, I think we have a winner here then.

CAS = Common Argument Scenario !!!

All who agree put your legs up (the proper leg please). Those who disagree, you are mis-informed. Get out of the room and you can only listen to MP3s from now on.....

Definitely the winner here ... and the 2 trophy models (actually, the 2 老 sifus ) to stand and pose next to htkaki would have to be... (take a guess!)

What a photo-op it would make!

LOL!

by **WongKN** on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:26 am

You and sflam ? Twisted Evil

by mugenfoo on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:30 am

no no no .... its specially reserved for forum MODERATORS only .....
jocolor

by **WongKN** on Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:51 am

Oh ? The admin and SJ ? Razz