Kana813, I don't own a RealityCheckCD, hence my question above for those who do own one. Perhaps I wasn't clear.
Showing 36 responses by tvad
In Issue 16 (November/December 2004) of Positive Feedback, Clark Johnsen wrote about the RealityCheck system in "The Biggest News You May Ever Read". In one particular section of the article, Mr Johnsen writes about George's CD burning policy: 1) Send him your CDs to be done at $25 a pop. You get back the original and the copy postpaid. I say thats too expensive, but maybe the price will come down. The present $65/CD fee represents a 160% increase. In my opinion, this is outrageous. I don't care how damn good the new CD is supposed to sound, when the price of admission to test the results increases 160%, then I'll pass thank you. Furthermore, if one reads Mr. Johnsen's article, one will learn that it was possible to have a single RealityCheck CD made for $5. So, now we are talking about a 1200% increase in the price to have a sample RealityCheck CD burned. No thanks. |
Norm, the $25/disc price comes from the article in issue 16 of Positive Feedback to which I refer in my post above in which Clark Johnsen writes: 1) Send him your CDs to be done at $25 a pop. You get back the original and the copy postpaid. I say thats too expensive, but maybe the price will come down. Then, in issue 21 of Positive Feedback, Clark Johnsen writes: Do you want in now? Entry comes at a price. Hold on to your hats. George will make you one of his own CD-Rs for$65! |
A fellow Audiogon member was kind enough to offer to make RealityCheckCDs from a few of my redbook CDs. Last night, I listened to a RealityCheckCD copy of a friend's commercially produced progressive rock CD which is a nicely layered and sonically dense recording, although I've always considered it edgy and bright. The RealityCheckCD mitigated the digital edge and lent some naturalness to the music, however it also somehow affected the ambience and extension. From a burned compilation CD I own of audiophile quality recordings, I compared Thomas Dolby's "I Scare Myself" to the RealityCheckCD version. The RealityCheckCD version defines the instruments and voice a bit more than the original burned CD, and the leading edge of the piano attack is softened a bit. I can see where this would be pleasing to some listeners. Overall, however, I find the RealityCheckCD, at least on this track, collapses the soundstage height and width and diminishes the layering somewhat. There is less ambience in the music, and micro details are reduced. For example, in the first 30 seconds of the track there is some brush work on a ride cymbal that is clearly defined on the standard burned CD. The RealityCheckCD version either pushes this cymbal work back in the mix or muddies it, I'm not sure which, but I suspect some tweaking in the frequency range where the attack of this sound originates, and I think this goes hand-in-hand with the loss of ambience in the recording. There is certainly a difference in the two recordings, but I'm not sure the effects of the RealityCheckCD process would be beneficial in all cases. I prefer the original version of this track, and it's a song I've been using for quite some time to evaluate equipment. I noticed this also while listening to "Walking on the Moon" by the Yuri Honing Trio from the same compilation CD. The saxophone sounds more natural in the RealityCheckCD version, and much closer to what I remember my vinyl sounding many years ago. However, the music sounds like it's being performed in a closed, cloth-walled room without any circulating air. So, the RealityCheckCD can make the music less digital and more natural, but to my ears, it also tweaks with a recording's extension and ambience to a degree that I find unsettling. |
Different strokes for different folks, Tbg. Vive la difference. I don't own a single recording of a performance that I have also heard live in the venue itself. In fact, most of the music I like has been recorded in a studio rather than a concert hall, so I can't begin to imagine what it sounded like in the venue. I understand the point you're making, though. I'm happy it works for you and has enhanced your listening experience. |
Unlike what Stanhifi suggests I have nothing to To be clear, if one re-reads my post, one will see that I did notice some positive effects of the RealityCheckCD system. I also noticed some effects that were not to my liking. I did not universally pan the process. Also, I know of at least two folks who are ambivalent about the results after having heard some RealityCheckCDs . Sometimes, for whatever reason, people choose to not post less-than-enthusiastic impressions. One should not assume the lack of published critical opinions automatically translates to universal acceptance of a product. I simply reported what I observed, and I believe it contributed some balance to the story |
If the data is transferred to a computer hard disk and then rewritten by a burner with a precision low-jitter clock and clean power, such as batteries, and the copy is made at low speed to get more accurate pit shapes, then the copy should be significantly better than the original. This prompts what is perhaps a silly question, but here it is. If one burns a black CD on a laptop computer running on battery power, and the copy is made at a low speed, would it then follow that this burned CD would conceivably be better than the original, notwithstanding the inferior clock on the computer? |
I am sure you heard This is getting a little embarassing, Bon. I think this whole debate comes down to preference, just like nearly every other aspect of the audio hobby. You prefer the sound of the RealityCheckCD. That's terrific. Are you going to buy a RealityCheckCD burner and discs and disc treatment system? |
Bon, in my opinion, there are two definitions of "air" that are bandied about on Audiogon. One means blackness, or silence, between instruments and vocalists. The other definition of "air" means a sense of the recording venue: ambience, echo, reverberation...those aural cues that give the listener a sense of place. Which of these two definitions are you using in your evaluation of the RealityCheckCD? |
Exlibris wrote: In my experience, the CD duplicates create a silence between images, but reduce "air." This tends to make poorly recorded studio albums sound cleaner and clearer. This echoes my observations as I listened and compared three original CDs and their RealityCheckCD copies. I did prefer the RealityCheckCD version of one recording to the CD original. With the other two, I preferred the CD original. The RealityCheckCD I liked better was a copy of a poorly recorded CD, the two RealityCheckCDs I did not prefer were copies of well recorded CDs. In all cases, my preferences were directly related to "air" and silence between images as described by Exlibris. |
Looks like a reality check on the RealityCheck at Audio Asylum. A primary point of the discussion is the availability of an apparently identical DVD/CD burner available at iopshop.com. |
Unless the IO Shop unit is far superior to my Mac duplicating a cd, however, Mr. Louis must be doing something further to the unit.And conversely, if the IO Shop unit IS far superior to your Mac (which is highly possible given the dedicated function of the IO Shop duplicator), then Mr. Louis is doing nothing to further the unit. George is being quite careful regarding the efficacy of his RealityCheck duplicator in this thread in which he states: I only guaranty mechanical, electrical, and electronic performance of the duplicator for one year including shipping both ways. But I don't claim that RealityCheckCDs even sound better or guaranty satisfaction with the duplicator's sonic performance Well, if he's not claiming the RealityCheckCDs sound better (than what, Mr. Louis?), then why should someone buy his product? In my view, there are now more questions than ever about the RealityCheck CD burning system. |
02-10-06: Tbg Norm, I am not questioning whether you receive value from your RealityCheck. You have clearly stated you do. The questions I believe arise out of the recent AA thread are: 1) What, if anything, does the RealityCheck burner ($795) provide which the burner sold through IO Shop ($229) does not? 2) Why George Louis published a statement on AA recanting his claims about the RealityCheck firmware? 3) What prompted Clark Johnsen to write: I hope George will be forgiven by you, but for myself, as a writer,in this thead today. 4) Why George sells 100 black CDRs for $100, when apparently identical, high quality black CDRs can be purchased here for $30/100? |
Memorex manufactures black CD-Rs with a suggested retail price of $24.99 for a pack of 50. I'll take these at $30 for a pack of 100 (and I did a quick websearch and found them elsewhere for a few bucks less). |
I have no doubt that carefully cleaning combined with using top flight media and high quality burners will improve the sound of regular stamped CDs.Agreed. I imagine burning onto high quality black CDRs makes an improvement in sound quality, regardless of the burner. It's an inexpensive experiment for $30. |
From the Clever Little Clock thread: 02-11-06: Tbg HiFi+ positively reviews the Clever Little Clock, Intelligent Chip and the Nespa? Doesn't encourage me to buy the Nespa, or to read HiFi+. Does HiFi+ plus have a sister publication, "UFO Today"? |
TBG quotes Mr. Louis as saying: But for sure, at this time there aren't any assembled duplicators sold online with even one Plextor DVD-RW drive let alone two Plextor DVD-RW drives each with their own 8MB memory buffers. He's wrong. Here's a DVD duplicator with two Plextor drives, each with an 8MB buffer, and a 64MB cache. Plextor DVD Duplicator This took 2 minutes to find on the internet. Mr. Louis' claims are still open to debate. |
02-13-06: TbgThat's not the point, Tbg. You're spinning. You quoted Mr. Louis as stating: But for sure, at this time there aren't any assembled duplicators sold online with even one Plextor DVD-RW drive let alone two Plextor DVD-RW drives each with their own 8MB memory buffers.That was Mr. Louis' statement. I did the homework and proved his statement is false. That's all. |
Tbg, let me make this crystal clear to you and all those reading this thread. I have never made any statements to the effect that copies made on the IO Shop duplicator are equal to, or not equal to the copies made on the RealityCheck system. I have pointed to the AA discussion in this original post: 02-10-06: Tvad...and I have asked questions. That's all. You have been extrapolating my questions regarding the veracity of Mr. Louis' claims as an endorsement of the IO Shop duplicator (or any Plextor drive based burner). Nothing is further from the truth. I, and others here, just want some straight answers from Mr. Louis about his system. When he makes claims that are false, like the one about NO other dual Plextor drive based DVD duplicators being available on the internet, then questions continue to be raised about the veracity of his other statements. I do not endorse one burner over the other. Like you, I will wait for some answers. |
Here's a 1 to 1 Plextor 716A duplicator with 8MB buffer for $349.95. |
Fiddler, thanks for confirming what I suspected was the truth. It's clear to me having done a little homework, that George's duplicator at $575 isn't that far off in price from the two other Plextor 716A duplicators I have found for $444 and $349.95, which offer better apples to apples comparisons. Still, the jury is out whether spending the extra money on George's duplicator reaps benefits. It might. Certainly, any comparison as Jfz suggests would have to have as many elements controlled as possible, i.e. matching black CDs, both using (or not using) George's liquid treatments, and marking the duplicates as "A" and "B", so only the creator(s) of the discs would know which was burned on which duplicator. Last, those with a leaning toward one duplicator or the other should not participate in the evaluation. No homers! |
Gentlemen, and ladies, asking questions are not attacks. They are due diligence. No one is being attacked here. That's the constant battle cry of those who support that which cannot, or will not, be verified. Everyone who puts forth new ideas is questioned about those ideas. As a Phd, no one knows this better than Tbg. All doctoral candidates must defend their theses. Mr. Louis should not be required to defend his invention? There's no room in the discussion for requiring proof of the process? Buyers of lucky rabbits feet will swear of the powers those fuzzy feet possess, but no one can provide any proof. The RealityCheck CD process clearly produces a different sounding disc. I've heard it. The question remains if there is another burner containing identical Plextor drives that produces the same changes. This is not a reasonable question? Of course it is. Mr. Louis has yet to provide any verifiable details of how his process is different from that available from off the shelf products. This remains at the core of the issue. |
Your argument has always hinged on the idea that technology outside audio is cheaper and equal.This is partly, true, yes. Since the Plextor duplicators are built to duplicate CDs and DVDs, I don't consider them outside of audio. In fact, audio and video duplication is their purpose. If we are speaking of high end audio as separate from professional audio (which the Plextors are designed for, as is demonstrated by the machines being built to duplicate dozens of discs at a time), then to me, this is semantics. If George is claiming his RealityCheck CD system is a higher echelon than pro duplication systems, then yes, I'd like to know what I'm paying for beyond the opinion of those who consider his duplication system to be better. There are plenty of folks who pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to modifiers who won't disclose what the modification entails, and simply tell their customers to "Trust me". I'd rather pay a modifier who will tell me what goes into the modification, and what my dollars are buying. So, there are options for both types of audiophiles...those who want to know the nuts and bolts, and those who don't care as long as it results in perceived better sound. I suppose I'd have been less aggressive with the RealityCheck CD system if Mr. Louis had just said, "Try it", and left it at that, without making up nonsensical explanations for how the thing works. Good listening, Tbg. |