I met a man at the recent NW Audio Show who had come only for the associated record fair.
He said he’d been collecting rare vinyl issues of bands inc. Simple Minds and Ultravox for over a decade, and now had thousands of records worth over £100k - but he’d only had a very cheap record player for the past 3 years and hardly ever used it!
Very nicely done. Seeing your NAT makes me annoyed that I missed out on one not too long ago. Do you use it as much as your other sources?
Hello, yes, All the time. the NAT01 is sometimes the best sounding of them all on live broadcasts. (I have a NAT02 in reserve also)
Fantastic setup and room Devraj ! Only the DBL’s that’s missing 
Out of interest what country are you in? In the UK FM on BBC has digitally less definition and lossy compared to CD. It can still sound good… but is quite a compromised signal… in the UK the BBC backbone for FM is on old school 32/14 NICAM digital encoding tech from the late 80s early 90s.
But it’s still analogue broadcasting to the Nat01.
Yes indeed the aging DACs are with the transmitters, and the reconstructed analogue signal is FM modulated in a stereo configuration, to then have the digitally reconstructed FM signal demodulated by an FM receiver… and traditional FM receivers used discriminators for this.
Kind of similar in a way to modern vinyl which is usually created by a digitally encoded master… but here the definition is much greater.
Then it has to be that analogue transmission still has advantages,as it sounds so much more live and engaging to listen to.
Probably more to do with the DAC you are comparing to. Stereo broadcast FM in the UK is dynamically compressed and bandwidth limited… and that might suit your replay system. I enjoy broadcast FM, but I am under no illusion it’s not a huge compromise. But sometimes it’s not about reality… I have some recordings from cassette that I absolutely adore. The NAT01 is certainly popular in some quarters in putting its own version of the compromise. I personally prefer the NAT03 
but when it comes to significant compromises it starts becoming quite subjective… everyone is a winner…
When listen to digital radio there is a delay compared to analogue broadcast,what happens there…?
Surely the simple answer is to build an FM receiver that converts the analogue signal to digital, applies some magical algorithm to the digital signal, converts to 48 bit, outputs to some form of reclocking device, then onto a dac.
Are you talking about DAB and AAC online? If so those use compressive lossy psychoacoustic codecs, which have a slightly greater latency and use a completely separate distribution network… compared to the digital NICAM and its aging digital network used in Broadcast FM. Broadcast FM does not use psychoacoustic compressive codecs
When he says it’s worth over £100,000 take that for a grain of salt, turns out it’s only worth what people will pay. The massive effort of selling each lp is another factor.
It’s like stamp collecting only appeals to certain group of loony’s. It’s fun is where the money is.
Maybe it’s those codecs that destroys the signal and also that in an analog tuner you don’t have a Dac , that degrades the content.
Yes, it cost him that, but would be much, much harder to sell for that price than it was to buy.
Is this the 2V output that most CD players run? When using older generation Arcam Alpha amplifiers I employed in-line RCA attenuators on the RCAs from my AA5 CDP - really ‘cleaned-up’ the sound. I didn’t need to do this with my Arcam A28 as 1) the pre-amp was less sensitive (better designed for high voltage inputs) and 2) the A28 had the facility to adjust input sensitivity on every input.
The attenuators are now employed between my dad’s Audio Analogue CDP and his Arcam amplifier with similarly positive results.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.