Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC recommendation
Gazjam;373338 Wrote: > You just guessing there gw43, or do you know something others dont? > > To be fair it doesn't look like it. > > http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=home_hifi&&ftab=FeedbackAsSeller&iid=320326474281&sspagename=VIP:feedback:2:uk I sent mine back as I could not tell any difference whatsoever between the Beresford and the SB3. To be absolutely fair Stanley refunded my money without any fuss at all, so it only cost me the postage. As I only wanted the DAC for the SB3, it was of no value to me in terms of improved sound quality. Just to avoid any doubt the rest of my system is an Arcam A85 and Monitor Audio GR10 speakers. To my ears the SB3 is a very good product, not easily (or cheaply) bettered. I was just speculating that maybe others had come to a similar conclusion -- gw43 gw43's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11327 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56069 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
I took today off from work. I had not spend a long day in front of the main audio system enjoying music. I spent 5 hours listening to my favourite music for music worshipping ritual, and playing percussion and flute with it. I contend I would have heard if anything was off with 7.3. I enjoyed the music as much as I have ever done since getting a SB. I do use an external DAC on my reference system, but 7.3 sounds sweet and undistinguishable from the original CD. My music listening theory is that I can imagine things for a song or two, but if I spent several hours listening to music without any fatigue and just as eager for the next song, than everything is alright :-) -- pablolie ...pablo Server: 3.3 GHz Intel E8600 Core 2 Duo (8GB) - Vista Ultimate 64 & Ubuntu 8.10 64 Sources: SB3 (4), SB Boom (2), Duet, Accuphase DP65v CD Amplifier: Accuphase E306v Loudspeakers: Ceeroy 3-way tuned by Darmstadt Psychoacoustics Lab Headphones: Grado SR-1 pablolie's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3816 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis wrote: > I say that there ARE differences. When two amplifiers have a 0,01% > diffrence of THD, it means that the sound is not the same. No, it most clearly does not mean that. It means that the measured THD is different. Whether THD differences of 0.01% is audible is a completely separate discussion. And its not very useful to talk about two amps having 0.01% THD. The proper measurement is at a specific power level with a bandwidth. Two amps may be identical in THD measurement at 10 watts, but different at 500 watts. > So, what I say, is that when we do an ABX test, we actually measure the > probability that some (any) auditors can find this difference. If they > don't find any, the test means nothing. No, its really much simpler than that. When you do an ABX test, you record the results. You calculate the probability that this result could happen purely by random chance. The more unlikely it is that the real measurements could happen by chance, the more confident you are that there was a real difference that was detected by your subjects. This is basic statistics, you don't have to rely on gut feelings. If you find that you can't say "with confidence" that the measured values are not just chance, you may say that there is no difference, or you may decide that your test was badly structured, and you should invent a better test. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis;373210 Wrote: > I say that there ARE differences. When two amplifiers have a 0,01% > diffrence of THD, it means that the sound is not the same. It's as > simple as that. > I don't pretend that you, me or anybody else can actually find this > difference, or even hear it. But there IS one : that's for sure. > It's the definition of the word "distortion". And this is what it > measures : differences. > > So, what I say, is that when we do an ABX test, we actually measure the > probability that some (any) auditors can find this difference. If they > don't find any, the test means nothing. I would suggest that "if they don't find any," then it shows that the differences are not audible for that sample group. "If they do find some," then it shows that the differences are audible. "If no one has ever found any," then it is very likely, though not certain, that the differences are not audible. -- jeffmeh jeffmeh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3986 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
As in having observed only white swans during a lifetime does not exclude the possibility that there actually is a black one... -- gbruzzo http://www.last.fm/user/JackieBr/ gbruzzo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3633 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
observing white swans for a lifetime does not allow us to imply that no black swan exists - you may indeed be right. -- gbruzzo http://www.last.fm/user/JackieBr/ gbruzzo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3633 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Black swan? As in the old metaphor for something that cant exist? I dunno mate, maybe its my brain being disconnected from my ears! Me, and the other guys that have heard what I've heard. Mass histeria? :-) Thinking about it for a second, there has been a change of server software AND a change of firmware at the same time. This might mean something, might not, I'm just saying it may be possible. Think about this(and this is ALL tongue in cheek :-) - so no sensitive souls out there get their panties in a twist.) In the statement made that 7.3 is measured as being exactly the same as 7.2... *Is every indicator that is measurable being measured to come to that conclusion?* Just being Devils Advocate I guess? -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Gazjam;373317 Wrote: > Did I make a funny? > > :-) > > > Its not just me you know. > I trust my ears above forum opinion, much like yourself I suspect? > > Technically I cant explain it. Go figure huh? Was this a black swan? -- gbruzzo http://www.last.fm/user/JackieBr/ gbruzzo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3633 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC recommendation
You just guessing there gw43, or do you know something others dont? To be fair it doesn't look like it. http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=home_hifi&&ftab=FeedbackAsSeller&iid=320326474281&sspagename=VIP:feedback:2:uk -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56069 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Ok, thanks for that. -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
I trust my ears fine. Unfortunately my ears are connected to my brain and it has been shown time and time again that you just can't trust the human brain to not lie to you in the most inconvenient and convincing way. -- andynormancx Yes, it will. Yes, all of them. Yes, SoftSqueeze as well. What ? I SAID ALL OF THEM ! andynormancx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17417 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Did I make a funny? :-) Its not just me you know. I trust my ears above forum opinion, much like yourself I suspect? Technically I cant explain it. Go figure huh? -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
This forum never fails to put a smile on my face. -- andynormancx Yes, it will. Yes, all of them. Yes, SoftSqueeze as well. What ? I SAID ALL OF THEM ! andynormancx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17417 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Yeah your right, you really need to listen to the same track/ set of songs both as background music (when the brain aint really looking for differences and actually comparing like for like). I think a few days/weeks whatever in needed to be really sure. Be interesting to see what you think of 7.3 -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
I got quite worried when I saw this thread; I then realised that I had noticed that the previous track didn't sound great, and the current one, a Beethoven concerto, also was a bit rough. Panic!!! So I checked the SC version - 7.2.1. I haven't bothered to upgrade yet. Then I engaged brain, and realised that this was a recording from the 1950s, and the previous one was a pretty dodgy digital one from the 80s. I had had it on random play and wasn't paying too much attention, so I only noticed the iffy sound when I listened for it. Put a track that I know well, and all is well. It'll probably be fine when I get round to upgrading to 7.3 as well. It's very easy to jump to conclusions based on imagination and little else in this game. -- adamslim Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others SB+, Audion 300Bs, Lowther Big Fun Horns with PM6As SB3, Charlize, Harbeth HL-P3ES Bm adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
Pat: Out of curiosity, what was your company called at that time. It all sounds very familiar. I have only been to a couple of big shows - one CES/High End about 10 years ago and the Stereophile show when it came to Los Angeles. I went to the LA show with a friend of mine and we quietly sat in many rooms and tried to hear stuff knowing that setups have a lot of compromises. Over the next couple of weeks we tracked what people thought were the best/worst rooms of the show online. I was shocked to see that some people liked what I thought were the worst rooms - so many people like very, very bright unmusical speakers (Gamt!?! - we bolted out of that room - just could not take it). On the other hand some of the best were not too expensive (Joseph Audio) and some expensive ones were good (Nola, Hyperion, Rockport). Money and quality of sound did not correlate well enough for me. -MA ar-t wrote: > Ok, back to your premise about cognitive psychology. > > When I did the fake preamp test, and they gave me that > deer-in-the-headlight look"I can't hear any > difference...was I supposed to..did I screw up...?", I then > moved on the next aspect of sorting out the keen listeners. > > Which, for those who are interested, was to try a listening test with > different UUTs, where everyone at the shop all agreed sounded a certain > way. Did not mean absolute correctness, but that they listened to things > in the same manner that we did, and came to the same conclusion. > > A self-fulfilling prophecy? Maybe. But we did have a certain target > market in mind. It would not have been beneficial to pick folks who > preferred the warmth of tubes, and would not be happy if our SS amps > did not have that "glorious midrange" that those folks seem to prefer. > We did have some listeners who did own some tube gear, but they also > had lots of SS gear as well. Picking listeners that we felt that we > could trust was tough. Having them disperse across the country over a > period of 20 years aided in our exit from active manufacturing. At > least on a full-time basis. We tried to assemble a new team about 5 or > so years ago, and found that all of us were now too old to be zealous > about any of it. > > Pat > > > ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
Ok, back to your premise about cognitive psychology. When I did the fake preamp test, and they gave me that deer-in-the-headlight look"I can't hear any difference...was I supposed to..did I screw up...?", I then moved on the next aspect of sorting out the keen listeners. Which, for those who are interested, was to try a listening test with different UUTs, where everyone at the shop all agreed sounded a certain way. Did not mean absolute correctness, but that they listened to things in the same manner that we did, and came to the same conclusion. A self-fulfilling prophecy? Maybe. But we did have a certain target market in mind. It would not have been beneficial to pick folks who preferred the warmth of tubes, and would not be happy if our SS amps did not have that "glorious midrange" that those folks seem to prefer. We did have some listeners who did own some tube gear, but they also had lots of SS gear as well. Picking listeners that we felt that we could trust was tough. Having them disperse across the country over a period of 20 years aided in our exit from active manufacturing. At least on a full-time basis. We tried to assemble a new team about 5 or so years ago, and found that all of us were now too old to be zealous about any of it. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis;373210 Wrote: > ... > So, what I say, is that when we do an ABX test, we actually measure the > probability that some (any) auditors can find this difference. If they > don't find any, the test means nothing. I like this sentence as I think it summarises most of what has been presented in this thread. I also think it's a perfect example where from correct premisses, the wrong conclusion has been drawn. I'd simply change it to: "If they don't find any, the difference is not worth the money (for them)." K -- slimkid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iAj2aPdQnk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wUP07DVq9E http://youtube.com/watch?v=nlrpe8Ig5m8 http://youtube.com/watch?v=dC9tGlwPln8 ATGATT: Because walking away in disgust beats riding away in an ambulance. slimkid's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8881 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
The other half of that story..and I can not name names, but.. "We" were supposed to be coming up with a better power supply for some company's product. I had doubts that we could, because the product itself was flawed, and it to be backwards compatible. IOW, make a better outboard POC without fixing the original POC, where the problem actually existed. So, "other obscure designer" and myself each made a new supply. We had a "shoot-out" of the two. "OK, put mine on. Ok, now put yours on." Repeat a few times. "Ok, I think I know how each sounds. Switch them out at random, and let's see if I can guess which one is which." After a short time.. "OK, I think that one is mine. Right?" "Yep." "OK, put the other one on now. Yep, first one is better. First is mine?" "Yep, you're right. It is yours." The only thing that he was right about was that #1 was his. #2 was also his! In fact, -they all were his!- I never hooked mine up. So, a slight twist on "No. 2". Especially when ego is involved. A few more examples of that (like flunking the preamp test), we decided to go our own ways. Despite being deaf, bone-headed and wrong most of the time, he did go on to make some good sounding stuff. Interestingly, because of its nature, it was something that I could quantify with all of our TDRs, spectrum analysers and network analysers. All he had to work with was his stubbournness and a Tek 475. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
You may see the water in the desert, but you're still going to die of thirst. Darren -- darrenyeats SB3 / Inguz -> Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) -> PMC AB-1 Dell laptop -> JVC UX-C30 mini system darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
wireless200;372905 Wrote: > It funny I ran across this thread today. I just upgraded to 7.3 last > night and I thought my Tranporter sounded *better* than before. I have > it for a while over several SC upgrades and never had that thought > before. I briefly thought about starting a thread asking the question: > do the software/firmware upgrades ever inprove sound quality? I'm not > talking about the glitchy stuff but the actual sound quality. This > latest release seemed to make mine sound better - more air, tighter > bass. I had exactly the same impression when upgrading from 7.2.1 to 7.3 and updating the firmware. "more air, tighter bass" - my thoughts exactly I wondered... regards, Giacomo -- gbruzzo http://www.last.fm/user/JackieBr/ gbruzzo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3633 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
ar-t;373205 Wrote: > > So, yes, I realise that just because someone says that they hear a > difference does not really mean that they do. > Good anecdote - and FYI that experiment has been done many times, always with that same result (and not just in audio; that kind of thing is the bread-and-butter of cognitive psychology experiments). Basically if you ask someone "which sounds better" they're going to try their hardest to hear a difference just to live up to the task, and most of the time they'll "succeed". Actually that's one reason ABX is superior to AB. In ABX, you know for sure X is either A or B, so you can focus on just trying to figure out which one X sounds closer to (and even then it's still easy to fool yourself). In AB (as in, "which do you prefer, A or B?") the question you're asked is more vague and open-ended, which makes it easier for your brain to get in your way like that. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373199 Wrote: > > Huh? You're not seriously claiming that because we can measure a > difference in (say) THD, that means there's an audible difference? > That would be patently absurd (ever heard of perceptual thresholds? > taken a hearing test?), so I can't imagine that's what you're saying. > Please clarify. I say that there ARE differences. When two amplifiers have a 0,01% diffrence of THD, it means that the sound is not the same. It's as simple as that. I don't pretend that you, me or anybody else can actually find this difference, or even hear it. But there IS one : that's for sure. It's the definition of the word "distortion". And this is what it measures : differences. So, what I say, is that when we do an ABX test, we actually measure the probability that some (any) auditors can find this difference. If they don't find any, the test means nothing. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis;373210 Wrote: > I say that there ARE differences. When two amplifiers have a 0,01% > diffrence of THD, it means that the sound is not the same. It's as > simple as that. > I don't pretend that you, me or anybody else can actually find this > difference, or even hear it. But there IS one : that's for sure. > It's the definition of the word "distortion". And this is what it > measures : differences. You said "The only problem, is that they actually ARE different, and that some people can actually distinguish some of the differences" and I asked you to prove it. I assumed by "distinguish" you meant "hear", not "look" or "measure with a scope". Was that mistaken? -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
opaqueice;373022 Wrote: > When someone says they can hear the difference between (say) cables, > there are basically two possibilities: > > 1) Swapping the cables altered the sound waves emanating from the > speakers in a way significant enough to be perceptible to the pair of > ears listening to them, or > > 2) The brain of the listener, knowing the cables were swapped, > perceived a difference that it wouldn't have had it not known they were > swapped. How and why we perceive things has always been of interest to me. Back when we were actively building selling gear, we went to great lengths to find listeners who we felt that we could trust. The first test that I conjured up to weed out the pretenders involved sticking the usual IC into the tape loop of a preamp. (One of ours, of course.) I got rid of anyone who claimed to hear a difference. None of us could, so we thought that was a valid test to weed out the loonies. But, one of the other principles of the outfit pointed out that it could argued that there was an extra IC in the chain, 2 more pairs of RCA jacks, maybe some additional contacts, etc., blah, blah. So, to shut him up and -really- weed out the loonies, I set up a preamp with a switch on the front panel that did absolutely nothing. Nothing other than make a clicking noise, and presenting the allusion of something being changed. I can not recall how many times since that I have pulled that stunt on people. Brings a whole new light to the concept of "No. 2". The "No. 2" referenced above, that is. I could not believe how many folks had to make an uneducated guess as to which one sounded better. (I actually pulled this very stunt on another equally obscure audio designer. He flunked every time! Yet, he did make some good stuff. I don't know how, though.) So, yes, I realise that just because someone says that they hear a difference does not really mean that they do. Pat -- ar-t http://www.analogresearch-technology.net ar-t's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13619 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice wrote: > ABX measures whether a difference is audible, or not. Technically, ABX gathers data points on whether the humans think they detect an audible difference. You then apply statistics to compare the results against random values. So you can say "we found X percent of the humans reported a difference, which with the sample size, lets us reject that its random with Y confidence. Usually Y has to be 95% or so before its considered science. There is always a chance, in this case 5% that there was no difference, or that the results were random. Doing ABX as opposed to AB testing just allows us to make the same statement with fewer data points. -- Pat Farrell http://www.pfarrell.com/ ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC recommendation
Labarum;369312 Wrote: > He has more business than he can handle at the moment. ...or getting too many back? -- gw43 gw43's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11327 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56069 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis;373169 Wrote: > Choosing has nothing to do. We are actually measuring the probability > that someone can accidentally find the difference. Sorry, I don't follow you. > > But, this is NOT what the methodology is used to measure. It pretends > to measure something else : the perceived difference. So, the > methodology is flawed. ;) Again - no idea what you're saying. ABX measures whether a difference is audible, or not. > > Easy. Scientific measures prove it. THDs, S/N ratios, etc. > We know it's different, that's not the point of the ABX tests. Huh? You're not seriously claiming that because we can measure a difference in (say) THD, that means there's an audible difference? That would be totally absurd, so I can't imagine that's what you're saying. Please clarify. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
ar-t;372401 Wrote: > Rather than tell me I am wrong and/or nuts. Chalk one up for the Lone > Prophet. Nah. You're nuts. ;-) -- lanierb lanierb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5566 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373147 Wrote: > Are you not an audio manufacturer/modder hawking your wares (on another > manufacturer's forum, of all places)? Not that I actually even said > you were...No. opaqueice;373147 Wrote: > Do you not have an agenda and a profit motive for people to believe > these things? On many fora manufacturers are required to identify > themselves as such in every post, precisely for these reasons. > > Feel free to correct me on either of those.No - so you're corrected. Now > please apologise and stick to the facts rather than the personal sniping. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Afew tips for a Transporter newbie
I thought I'd leave them running while I was out today and I think the speakers seem to have run-in a bitbut it could be me just me trying to convince myself. The speakers haven't really had much running in time. -- richardl10 richardl10's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=22045 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56769 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Afew tips for a Transporter newbie
Shredder;373162 Wrote: > What are the in-walls? No offense, but i too have never heard an in-wall > in the league of the TP. Polk RTS series, supposed to be pretty good, that's the problem with in-walls...you can't really audition them and trust M+K to go bust when I'm looking for a set of in-walls. -- richardl10 richardl10's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=22045 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56769 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373150 Wrote: > In the best ABX methodologies, listeners can -choose- which sections to > listen to (zoom in on that small piece, in your analogy). Or failing > that, the passages that exhibit the greatest differences are selected > by the test administrator. In your analogy, it's clear such a > procedure would make the task of finding differences much -easier-, > just as it does for audio. > > But again, absolutely -nothing- about ABX requires short samples. > Choosing has nothing to do. We actually measuring the probability that someone can accidentally find the difference. But, this is NOT what the methodology is used to measure. It pretends to measure something else : the perceived difference. So, the methodology is flawed. ;) opaqueice;373150 Wrote: > > Prove it. Easy. Scientific measures prove it. THDs, S/N ratios, etc. We know it's different, that's not the point of the ABX tests. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Afew tips for a Transporter newbie
What are the in-walls? No offense, but i too have never heard an in-wall in the league of the TP. -- Shredder Shredder's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11380 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56769 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Themis;373072 Wrote: > > Then, we take several people, and two different pictures (A and B) > along with a third one (X) which is a copy of one of them. > Then, we cut a small piece of each picture (say 1 billionth of it) and > we ask each time to try to determine whether the piece of the X picture > is the same as the part of the A or the part of the B one. > If they can't determine whether this small part of X is for sure part > of the A or B, and if the panel of the observers is large enough, then > we can conclude that the A and B pictures are the same and can't be > distinguished. In the best ABX methodologies, listeners can -choose- which sections to listen to (zoom in on that small piece, in your analogy). Or failing that, the passages that exhibit the greatest differences are selected by the test administrator. In your analogy, it's clear such a procedure would make the task of finding differences much -easier-, just as it does for audio. But again, absolutely -nothing- about ABX requires short samples. > The only problem, is that they actually ARE different, and that some > people can actually distinguish some of the differences. Prove it. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Patrick Dixon;373071 Wrote: > Why is it that you always stoop to personal abuse? Are you not an audio manufacturer/modder hawking your wares (on another manufacturer's forum, of all places)? Not that I actually even said you were... Do you not have an agenda and a profit motive for people to believe these things? On many fora manufacturers are required to identify themselves as such in every post, precisely for these reasons. Feel free to correct me on either of those. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
I ran the DTS test today all OK here. I did it when i first got my SB to ensure myself on that i can have bit perfect transport in MY setup. well I did it again afaik SC7.3.1 does not manipulate any bit's. Unless you tell it to via RG or transcoding or volume control. SPDIF data arrives at my surround processor unmolested :) It's sounds as good as it always has =very good Btw you can test your whole SC setup this way: Burn a DTS encoded WAV as normal CD track, rip this and do your usual stuff. Listen to it if one bit is missing it will turn everything into white noise. -- Mnyb Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Am I imagining this? Squeezecentre 7.3 sounds worse than 7.2.1?
Hi OP here again, I had said that I thought - after reinstalling, cleaning out registry etc etc - that 7.3 sounded AT LEAST as good as 7.2.1., possibly even better? I had put that one down to the placebo effectbut to my ears it DID sound tighter...with better soundstaging. Been running it for a few days now listening to tracks I am very familiar with. I keep picking up on the different presentation (subtle mind you) of different songs, even when its background listening. You know what? 7.3 DOES sound different. Pretty much as described above I'd say. Biggest difference to me is in the tighter bassits not that theres less of it,its just more controlled. Sub bass is still sub bass. Top end is more open and airy. Its not night and day stuff..but its noticeable and IS there. IS the new squeezecentre talking nicer to windows? I dunno - it doesnt really matter. 7.3 is a great upgrade. -- Gazjam Gazjam's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18604 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56591 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Afew tips for a Transporter newbie
richardl10;372969 Wrote: > > I'm hoping to get the player sounding better and it's not the new > speakers that aren't upto the job. uh..how do you know? Most in-walls I've heard are good only for background music. -- ghostrider ghostrider's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18959 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56769 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] More Classical lossless FLAC downloads from DG
vrobin;369707 Wrote: > sold the same price as the CD release... there is still room for > progress!! > They could at least knock off the cost of making the physical CD; about $0.25 I reckon. -- Mick Seymour Mick Seymour's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21137 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=55798 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
This is how I feel about ABX tests and their methodology: Let's take two different drawings (you know, the old "10 differences" quizz^^). Lets say now they have 100 small differences. It's the "find the 100 differences" game. Then, we take several people, and we let them observe the two pictures (A and B) along with a third one (X) which is a copy of one of them. Then, we cut a small piece of each picture (say 1 billionth of it) and we ask each time to try to determine whether the piece of the X picture is the same as the part of the A or the part of the B one. If they can't determine whether this small part of X is for sure part of the A or B, and if the panel of the observers is large enough, then we can conclude that the A and B pictures are the same and can't be distinguished. The only problem, is that they actually ARE different, and that some people can actually distinguish some of the differences. So, the methodology is broken, since it leads to a faulty conclusion. Easy. -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
opaqueice;373029 Wrote: > They're usually done that way for two reasons: > > 1) Some research has shown that subtle differences are much -easier- to > hear when the clips are short, and > > 2) It takes less time that way. > > There is no reason in the world why it can't be done with longer clips > - the ABX format is perfectly compatible with that. Personally, I've > done a number of ABX tests using a computer program (for example, to > hear the difference between MP3 and WAV). In my experience it's much > easier to hear the differences when you first identify a section where > it's potentially audible and then switch back and forth rapidly on that > section. It's possible other types of effects are easier to hear over a > long term, but I'm not aware of any reason to think so other than the > (more or less worthless) word of audio manufacturers hawking their > wares. > > > > That's another old canard, which is not only obviously false (these > tests have been used for decades in research to establish hearing > thresholds, and if what you said were true those thresholds would all > be zero, an obvious absurdity), but disposed of in 30 seconds of > googling (many DBTs just in high-end audio falsify what you said). > > Of course we've had this discussion before and you're still repeating > the same falsehood, so I can only assume you have an agenda. Why is it that you always stoop to personal abuse? -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
BigTony;373064 Wrote: > My philosopy: Minimise the variation that we can (better cables, stable > power supply, low jitter, low noise etc) and then whats left we can > modify with a glass or two of whiskey. Same philosophy here. :) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
In my day job I build mathematical models (well someone has too!) Recently I've been knee deep in NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) spectra of polymers. The gist is this : we take a spectra of the polymer process via the NMR every 15 minutes. Each spectra contains 2,000 points. If I print out these spectra, it really is quite hard (impossible) to tell them apart whilst the process is working well, visually. However, mathematically it is possible, and even though the difference are slight they can (and are) used to control the process. Back in the audio world, some things sound the same, but are different, these differences are slight, but they are there. Some people have better sensors (ears/amps/headphones etc) than others and they can hear difference that others don't hear. Mathematically we can look at the audio data and see that different chips produce different signals, these differences are small, but they are there. Engineering attempts to reduce this 'uncontrolled variabilty' to a minimun, but there is usually a cost curve to use, at what cost is a desired result good enough? Human ears are difficult things to use as sensors, because they are affected by what they are sensing, the time of day, the mood of the person etc.. all of which are also uncontrolled variables; so listening to the same sound on different days will not result in them 'sounding' the same! (My rig always sounds better late at night!) The question is this; which of these two sources of variablity has the biggest effect, variation in the actual signal or variation in the listeners? My philosopy: Minimise the variation that we can (better cables, stable power supply, low jitter, low noise etc) and then whats left we can modify with a glass or two of whiskey. -- BigTony We're Only In It For The Music! www.zappateers.com BigTony's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10638 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Afew tips for a Transporter newbie
Going full blast into an amop without any form of vol contol is a bad option , set your internal jumpers so that 100% vol sounds as loud as you want with minimal distortion and then use the transporters digital vol control to tweak" -- Rodney_Gold Sb3/Z-sys RDP1/meridian DSP5500's TP/X-cans v3/Senns 650's TP/TACT 2.0/SCM 50a's TP/Meridian DSP5000's "The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is...the feeling you get when you stop" Rodney_Gold's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14618 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56769 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
Patrick Dixon;372472 Wrote: > The problem I have with DBT in audio, is not that it's DB at all - it's > that the tests are normally conducted using repeated short music clips. They're usually done that way for two reasons: 1) Some research has shown that subtle differences are much -easier- to hear when the clips are short, and 2) It takes less time that way. There is no reason in the world why it can't be done with longer clips - the ABX format is perfectly compatible with that. Personally, I've done a number of ABX tests using a computer program (for example, to hear the difference between MP3 and WAV). In my experience it's much easier to hear the differences when you first identify a section where it's potentially audible and then switch back and forth rapidly on that section. It's possible other types of effects are easier to hear over a long term, but I'm not aware of any reason to think so other than the (more or less worthless) word of audio manufacturers hawking their wares. > Add to that the pressure that people feel when they're being tested, > and as ar-t says, we generally end up with the result that everything > sounds the same. That's another old canard, which is not only obviously false (these tests have been used for decades at least in research to establish thresholds, and if it were true the thresholds would all be zero, an obvious sbsurdity), but disposed of in 30 seconds of googling (tons of DBTs even in high-end audio falsify what you said). Of course we've had this discussion before and you're still repeating the same falsehood, so I can only assume you have an agenda. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Audible vs inaudible
ar-t;372883 Wrote: > This was not directed at anyone on this forum, or anyone specifically. I > talk to a number of industry folk on a daily basis, and > well...we all were about as frustrated the same amount about > this subject. You would be surprised how often we hear this lodged > against all of us. > > How I perceive (key word) how something sounds can not be quantified. I > can measure things that I think can explain it, but not always. THD can > easily be measured, and no one will dispute those results. But how it > is perceived by the listener can not. If you could, no one would listen > to tube amps. (I don't, so there!) Not to speak for CatBus, but I think you might have missed the point there. The debate is not over quantifying -how- you perceive something - that's a job for neurobiologists. It's over quantifying -what- and -when- you can perceive it, and -how much- of an effect it takes. When someone says they can hear the difference between (say) cables, there are basically two possibilities: 1) Swapping the cables altered the sound waves emanating from the speakers in a way significant enough to be perceptible to the pair of ears listening to them, or 2) The brain of the listener, knowing the cables were swapped, perceived a difference that it wouldn't have had it not known they were swapped. Reporting a perceived difference in an uncontrolled listening test cannot distinguish between those, and neither can measurements (because the measurements might be more, or less, sensitive than the ears in question). Instead, one must either do a blind test (which eliminates 2) as a possibility) or absent that trust the last 150 years of research on human hearing and psychoacoustics, which tells us in most cases where the perception thresholds are. Unfortunately audio subjectivists (and I'm -not- putting you in that category) often don't seem to recognize that 2) is a possibility at all. That's plain old counterfactual burying your head in the sand (there's -mountains- of evidence that 2) is extremely common), and it's the root of many of these endless debates. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56712 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] jitter
ar-t;372636 Wrote: > Well, I read 'em both. Yeah, not much mention of that, but I can > conclude (with a high degree of certainty) that both refer to *word > clock*. IOW, 44.1 kHz. If you look closely at the first paper, they > point out that everyone could hear 2 uSec of jitter. You simply can not > make a 256 Fs clock that bad. Thanks for taking the time to do this. So... it seems that these papers are establishing some sort of ball-park threshold of audibility for word clock jitter. So here's the important question: when we see published specs for jitter on a transport's SPDIF output, which is it: word or bit clock jitter? Seems like it's crucial that we know the difference before we can even start guessing at whether it's a respectable figure. I realise that your personal interest is in reducing jitter on the clocks inside DACs, but to the man in the street that's not really important: he buys DAC X or DAC Y according to which sounds better. Whether the improvement is down to better analogue circuitry, lower internal jitter, or other factors (such as noise pickup from the environment) is frankly of no consequence to him: he's in no position to change it. -- cliveb Transporter -> ATC SCM100A cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Good sound from Squueezebox
maxrob200;372865 Wrote: > Now to see if some company comes out with an "audiophile" grade switch > that sells for a zillion dollars and delivers heavenly sound because of > the unobtanium used in it. > On a more serious note, it is perhaps worthwhile to take a closer look > at different types and quality of switches on the market. Maybe someone > on the forum with technical expertise may look at the possible reasons > for switches affecting sound quality, could it be the topology or chips > etc? Well, there IS an electrical connexion between the switch and the SB/TP. One probably needs proper equipment to measure any differences (and to know what he's looking for). ;) -- Themis SB3 - North Star dac 192 - Denon 3808 - Sonus Faber Grand Piano Domus Themis's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=55950 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
