UID14378
威望35
金钱81765
交易诚信度2
主题50
帖子1702
注册时间2001-11-21
最后登录2024-6-12
高级会员
   
交易诚信度2
注册时间2001-11-21
|
马上注册 家电论坛,众多有奖活动等你来参与!
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有账号?注册
x
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Are+copied+CDs+sonically+inferior+to+the+original%3F+(Straits+of+the...-a0104439784
英文好的自己去看。
测试组织者使用Phillips CDR-778 CD录音机分别用CD-R和CD-RW进行刻录,然后邀请了5位音乐工作者参与测试。
偶英文比较烂,简单翻译了文章的要点。各位将就着看一下。
测试组织者引用了一段金耳朵评测Phillips CDR-778的文章:
Nothing better exemplifies this claim more succinctly than the following quotes from a review of the CDR-778. To wit: "Careful comparison between the digital copy and original source uncovered some interesting results: I could tell the recorded version. Not once but every time." Also, "But put in the CDR recording and the original and yes I could tell one from the other. Swap them between players and yes the difference is there. The original CD had more body and bottom end substance than the recording."
没有什么能比这篇关于CDR-778的评测更有代表性了。这篇评测文章写道:“仔细地对比刻录盘和原盘以后发现如下有趣的现象:我能识别出录音的版本,不仅仅是一次,而是每次如此。”作者还说:“我能够识别出刻录盘和原盘,即使换用不同的CD机,区别仍然可以分辨:原盘比刻录盘具有更好的聚焦(more body)和更结实的低频(bottom end)。”
测试使用的原版碟:
Disc A was Andre Previn's After Hours with Joe Pass and Ray Brown (Telarc Jazz 83302).
Disc B was the RCA/BMG Living Stereo-Gold release of Rimsky-Korsakov's Scheherazade.
结论:
The test results were statistically insignificant, which in the parlance of the street means the listeners couldn't distinguish the originals from the copies. The ultimate test here, as I mentioned above, was a group of five musicians comparing the original Previn CD (CD A) to the two copies. They enjoyed what they were doing, did listening tests over minutes, hours, days, and weeks, and volunteered their services for future double-blind tests!
测试的结果不具有统计学意义,通俗一点说就是无法分辨原版和刻录盘。这次参与测试的人员,是5位音乐家,他们分别来比较Disc A和它的两个拷贝。他们对这个测试非常感兴趣,开始是一分钟接着一分钟地听,到后来是一小时又一小时、一天又一天、一个星期又一个星期,他们还自愿继续进行盲听测试。
拜托各位,吵架就免了,我只不过想探讨这个问题,而且非常希望能和反方烧友见面交流。
当然拒绝盲听测试的,道不同不相为谋。
[ 本帖最后由 Fly Mouse 于 2009-9-21 15:56 编辑 ] |
|