CD Player




I won’t even pay for iPhone apps. Because I refuse to be tied to their ecosystem. In my life I try to use a healthy mix of Apple, Microsoft, and Google as to not become reliant on any one ecosystem and company.

I quit worrying about such trivial stuff when the doctor used the C word on me a few years ago. I realized that life is short and some things are far, FAR more important than what a lot of people worry about. YMMV.
I’ve listened to SA-CD and I find them to be inferior to CD. Cleaner sound, sure, but sound in real life isn’t clean. It sounds fake, or manufactured. I like the imperfections you get on CDs and even more on vinyl as it gives you that authentic sound. On a good system I want that.
From a format standpoint, SACD/DVD is superior to CD . . . although one could have a CD player with some great DACs, and a SACD/DVD player with crap DACs, and the CD player might sound better. It's also largely dependent upon how the discs were mastered.
There are more than a few people that like vinyl/analog more, which is another subject I could probably harp on about for hours. Again, a lot of this is in the mastering, while some of this is bias due to what old farts like us grew up listening to.
Either way, whether it's written on a CD or flash memory or a hard drive, uncompressed digital audio will sound the same given equivalent DACs. It's all the same pattern of 0s and 1s.
From a format standpoint, SACD/DVD is superior to CD . . . although one could have a CD player with some great DACs, and a SACD/DVD player with crap DACs, and the CD player might sound better. It's also largely dependent upon how the discs were mastered.
There are more than a few people that like vinyl/analog more, which is another subject I could probably harp on about for hours. Again, a lot of this is in the mastering, while some of this is bias due to what old farts like us grew up listening to.
Either way, whether it's written on a CD or flash memory or a hard drive, uncompressed digital audio will sound the same given equivalent DACs. It's all the same pattern of 0s and 1s.
To me the act of using a laser to read raw data is more analog than parsing the file system to then read a file which contains 1’s and 0’s.
It’s about overhead and processing. The closer you get to reading raw data the more analog it is. By this logic a RAW digital photo is more analog than a JPEG.
To me the act of using a laser to read raw data is more analog than parsing the file system to then read a file which contains 1’s and 0’s.
It’s about overhead and processing. The closer you get to reading raw data the more analog it is. By this logic a RAW digital photo is more analog than a JPEG.

I will say that there is no such thing as "more analog", as analog and digital are mutually exclusive. Analog is an infinite set of values read as a continuous stream of data, whereas digital is an approximate representation of analog data made by taking samples at regular intervals and assembling them to reproduce this data as best as possible.
Whether it's read by a laser, a hard drive head, or directly from RAM makes zero difference. The only thing that makes any difference is whatever digital signal processing is taking place and the digital-to-analog conversion that transforms the raw numbers into a waveform you can actually hear.
As far as pictures go, RAW looks more "lifelike" because it's unprocessed and uncompressed. That doesn't mean it's analog (like film is). JPEG just removes a lot of that digital data to cut down on the filesize.

I will say that there is no such thing as "more analog", as analog and digital are mutually exclusive. Analog is an infinite set of values read as a continuous stream of data, whereas digital is an approximate representation of analog data made by taking samples at regular intervals and assembling them to reproduce this data as best as possible.
Whether it's read by a laser, a hard drive head, or directly from RAM makes zero difference. The only thing that makes any difference is whatever digital signal processing is taking place and the digital-to-analog conversion that transforms the raw numbers into a waveform you can actually hear.
As far as pictures go, RAW looks more "lifelike" because it's unprocessed and uncompressed. That doesn't mean it's analog (like film is). JPEG just removes a lot of that digital data to cut down on the filesize.
To me processing and compressing things discretizes them more making them inferior.
I also find vision to be less analog in nature than sound. Going back to my earlier post. Mostly because your ears work on vibrations while your eyes work on “beams” of light (particles as opposed to waves of light). Making vision inherently more digital than audio to the human brain.
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
BUT, still, people have to have CD players to play those 141 million CD's they bought, don't they? What about the hundreds and hundreds of millions of CD's purchased during the past decade. Don't people want to listen to them also using a CD player?
I don't play CD's at home, but I do when driving my cars(especially on long road trips out in the boonies), and can't find a radio station that plays the music I like to listen to.
Having a CD player in a car is important to me. Not everyone that buys a new car is a 25 year old "techie" that refuses to listen to CD's. Plenty of us "old folks" buy news cars every year and a bunch of us have CD's that we want to continue to listen to.
Times and technology changes. You can change with it or bitch about it. Do you still have your 8-tracks?
I won’t even pay for iPhone apps. Because I refuse to be tied to their ecosystem. In my life I try to use a healthy mix of Apple, Microsoft, and Google as to not become reliant on any one ecosystem and company.
Not a troll.
I really would like to know how to rip CDs and copy the MP3s onto a jump drive and have them play in CD/Chapter order. The problem is exacerbated by having the MP3s have the same name on multiple CDs. Also, the infotainment system tries to reorganize the MP3s in some unknown order for playback and seems to ignore folders.
put a 1 in front of the first file name you want to play
2 in front of the second one
etcetera
if you don't do this it's play em in alphabetical order
the numerals will supersede this
make sure nothing is set on random play
I can do this with music, I assume it'll work for books on tape
Last edited by drobbins; Dec 2, 2017 at 09:07 PM. Reason: can't spell
The CUE SW in the CT6 is HMI 2.0 just as the C7 (2016+). The HMI 1.2 in 2014 and 2015 is comparable to the CUE in the original ATS which also had a CD.
Stop saying it's the SW, it's NOT the SW, it's that the Corvette hardware lacks the expansion port.
put a 1 in front of the first file name you want to play
2 in front of the second one
etcetera
if you don't do this it's play em in alphabetical order
the numerals will supersede this
make sure nothing is set on random play
I can do this with music, I assume it'll work for books on tape
Also, I assume there is some sort of file that maintains the mapping between the MP3 file and it's order in the book. As such I could envision writing a small little script to read that file, figure out the ordering and do the renaming of all the files. In fact, I'm sure if you look around you'll see that others have probably already done this.
Last edited by defaria; Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM.












