Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] To pre or not to pre
My system is balanced throughout. Tried driving the poweramps directly from the transporter. Managed to convince myself that there was a significant improvement - probably best way to describe it was a lowering of the noise floor. Didn't have attenuators (a route I would not recommend) so was having to use digital volume below 80. Not ideal. Also with the amps capable of 250W per channel was wondering whether I would be picking bass driver out of my hair. I went back to using the pre, as it is also the processor and heart of my AV system. I couldn't live without the functionality. If you are using a transporter in a dedicated 2 channel set up, I would strongly recommend direct plus attentuators (and balanced if your system is capable of it). -- Andy8421 Andy8421's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16846 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61821 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] To pre or not to pre
Andy8421;410686 Wrote: Didn't have attenuators (a route I would not recommend) [snip] I would strongly recommend direct plus attentuators (and balanced if your system is capable of it). There seems to be a contradiction in your recommendations here. Is there a typo, perhaps? Do you think attenuators are a good idea or not, and if not, why? (FWIW, my view is that using passive attenuation for correct gain staging is crucial). -- 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=61821 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
El Duderino;410682 Wrote: Without this level of objectivity in endpoints, it is hard to design a relevant double-blind, randomized controlled trial. In testing audio, the endpoint is as subjective as it gets ie Does A sound better than B. Therefore, the design of any double-blind study is compromised right from the start. I think you may have misunderstood the end goal of ABX testing in audio. The endpoint is NOT does A sound better than B. It's much simpler: does A sound DIFFERENT than B. No preference judgements are called for: simply the detection (or otherwise) of an audible difference. That strikes me as eminently measurable and open to statistical analysis. -- 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=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Klimax DS - Network Music Player
El Duderino;410682 Wrote: The problem here is that many individuals seem to think that you can take the scientific concept of a double-blind randomized controlled trial and apply it to areas which one could argue are distinctly non-scientific. This is a fallacy. What is a fallacy is thinking that sighted comparisons...of just about anything involving the five senses...aren't influenced by expectation bias. That is acknowledged generally to be a very unrealistic viewpoint. This unusual belief is popular only in the audiophile world as far as I know. Darren -- darrenyeats http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503. (Inguz bass EQ'd) SB3 - (pre bypassed) Krell KAV-300i - PMC AB-1 (caps bass EQ'd) Laptop - Genius Slab SW-flat2.1 700 SB3 / Rio Karma / Laptop - JVC UX-C30 / Sennheiser PX-100 darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38815 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
Recent postings in some threads here have stirred up that old hornets nest of blind testing once again. The antagonists have once again set out their uncompromising positions, with no prospect of reaching any kind of shared view. So, at the risk of getting badly stung by the angry hornets, I present here some thoughts that try to find a middle ground. Are you sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin... There exists within the audio enthusiast community two diametrically opposed camps, which for the sake of argument we'll call Objectivists and Subjectivists. What their argument is about we'll come to later. But first, let's summarise what they agree on. Both groups acknowledge that when comparing two similar components (eg. CD players, amplifiers, etc), there are times that a difference is heard when listening sighted, but no difference can be detected when a blind comparison is made. It's in their analysis of why this might be so that the two groups diverge. The Objectivist seems to take the view that since there is no difference in the detectable soundfield (as evidenced by a blind comparison), the difference heard during sighted listening is down to other factors, such as the appearance and feel of the equipment, knowledge of its price and manufacturer, etc. The Objectivist typically considers that to allow oneself to be influenced by these other factors is some kind of character flaw. And here is a curious thing. The Subjectivist thinks exactly the same as the Objectivist: that to allow oneself to be so influenced is a character flaw. They therefore draw the conclusion that the difference heard is not down to any such external factors, but must be due to some problem with the blind comparison methodology that prevents the differences being detected. Why not just accept the fact that external factors do modify what we hear, and it is human nature that it does so? It's only reasonable that the satisfaction in operating an exquisitely finished CD player will enhance the listening experience. There's no shame in it. Objectivists should stop telling people they are deluding themselves when they hear a difference, and Subjectivists should stop insisting that the difference they hear can't be down to these external factors. Then we could all live in harmony, world peace would ensue, blah blah blah... Here's an analogy. You have two servings of food: one is presented artistically and looks nice on the plate; the other is the same but has been pre-cut up, mixed and dumped into a bowl. Once the food is in the mouth, there's no difference, but pretty much everyone would think the nicely presented food tasted better. And I can't imagine that any objective food scientist would question their sanity. -- 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=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
I think you are missing the point. A-B-X testing, blind or otherwise, as advocated by the (pseudo-)objectivists is a poor way to judge differences between systems, because it is more a test of musical memory than musical perception. For it to be useful, you have to be capable of remembering the A and the B and then comparing these memories to the X. While Mozart is reputed to have heard Allegri's Misere once and then wrote out the score from memory, few normal people can remember more than a few seconds of a musical experience, and then only some aspects of it. Imagine, for example, listening to a minute long guitar solo - several hundred notes, lets say. Now imagine listening to the same musician playing a very similar solo, but changing some notes or some subtleties of phrasing, perhaps in the middle, as musicians do. Now imagine someone playing one of the solos again, and asking you which was which? Bet you couldn't always do it reliably. Doesn't mean they were the same. -- JezA JezA's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21219 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
JezA;410762 Wrote: A-B-X testing, blind or otherwise, as advocated by the (pseudo-)objectivists is a poor way to judge differences between systems, because it is more a test of musical memory than musical perception. For it to be useful, you have to be capable of remembering the A and the B and then comparing these memories to the X. So if I understand you correctly, you're basically saying that it's impossible to compare two components, sighted or otherwise, to determine whether they sound the same. Is that your position? If it is, then how do explain why someone would think that one component is better than another if they can't even tell whether they are different? Perhaps you might argue that it's not a matter of whether they sound different, but simply whether one gives greater pleasure than the other. In that case, I will point out that ABX is not the only form of blind testing possible. It is entirely feasible for someone to listen to two components A and B many times over (each time A and B might - or might not - swap places), and on each occasion simply say which they prefer. Analysis of the results will show whether there is a statistically meaningful preference for one over the other. -- 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=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
cliveb;410749 Wrote: Objectivists should stop telling people they are deluding themselves when they hear a difference, and Subjectivists should stop insisting that the difference they hear can't be down to these external factors. Good thoughts! You could apply them on other subjects. The blind testing controversy here reminds me of the discussion between homeopathy and conventional medicine (...which has been going on for the last 200 years, so don't expect harmony too soon. But hope dies last, thanks for posting!) -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
Quad;410778 Wrote: Good thoughts! You could apply them on other subjects. The blind testing controversy here reminds me of the discussion between homeopathy and conventional medicine (...which has been going on for the last 200 years, so don't expect harmony too soon. But hope dies last, thanks for posting!) As far as I know only audiophiles have the unusual belief that the placebo effect doesn't apply to them. Don't drag the alternative medicine guys into it, they're with the rest of the world. Make no mistake, the audiophiles are alone. My wife was taught about how the placebo effect works when she took a course on Reiki healing a few years ago. So even Reiki healers accept the placebo effect applies to their so-called New Age practices. But audiophiles don't accept it applies to their hearing. Nuff said! Darren -- darrenyeats http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503. (Inguz bass EQ'd) SB3 - (pre bypassed) Krell KAV-300i - PMC AB-1 (caps bass EQ'd) Laptop - Genius Slab SW-flat2.1 700 SB3 / Rio Karma / Laptop - JVC UX-C30 / Sennheiser PX-100 darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
cliveb;410775 Wrote: So if I understand you correctly, you're basically saying that it's impossible to compare two components, sighted or otherwise, to determine whether they sound the same. Is that your position? . No it is not my position. I said that A-B-X testing is a poor way of evaluating components, because it is more a test of memory than anything else. It is perfectly possible to compare two components. Do you understand that? -- JezA JezA's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21219 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
cliveb;410749 Wrote: Here's an analogy. You have two servings of food: one is presented artistically and looks nice on the plate; the other is the same but has been pre-cut up, mixed and dumped into a bowl. Once the food is in the mouth, there's no difference, but pretty much everyone would think the nicely presented food tasted better. And I can't imagine that any objective food scientist would question their sanity. Not to stir the pot to much, but I find it rather odd that your analogy very much involves SIGHT when your post is about Double Blind Testing. -- iPhone *iPhone* Media Room: Transporter, VTL TL-6.5 Signature Pre-Amp, Ayre MX-R Mono's, Vandersteen Quatro, VeraStarr 6.4SE 6-channel Amp, VCC-5 Reference Center, four VSM-1 Signatures, Runco RS 900 CineWide AutoScope 2.35:1 Living Room: Duet, ADCOM GTP-870HD, Cinepro 3K6SE III Gold, Vandersteen Model 3A Signature, Two 2Wq subs, VCC-2, Two VSM-1 Kitchen: Squeezebox BOOM Bedroom: SB3, GFR-700HD, Thiel 2.3, Second Boom Home Office: SB3, NAD C370, two VSM-1 Home Gym: SB3, Parasound Vamp v.3, Thiel PowerPoint 1.2 House Portable: SB3, Audioengine A5 Thunderbird: Duet, Mac Mini Expedition: SB3, ToughBook iPhone's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13622 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
iPhone;410810 Wrote: Not to stir the pot to much, but I find it rather odd that your analogy very much involves SIGHT when your post is about Double Blind Testing. 1. The word blind in blind testing doesn't refer to having no sense of sight. It's about not knowing the identity of the candidate at hand. Hence you can (and reviewers DO*) have blind tests on televisions. The frame of the television is covered so the tester doesn't know which unit is being looked at. 2. Clive's analogy is pretty good actually. You see a big shiny box with a Linn badge on it and admittedly it looks great. You see a dinky cheap looking box with a Squeezebox badge on it and it looks not so great! It changes the listening experience. Excellent analogy. Darren PS: *Remember what I said about the rest of the world? -- darrenyeats http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503. (Inguz bass EQ'd) SB3 - (pre bypassed) Krell KAV-300i - PMC AB-1 (caps bass EQ'd) Laptop - Genius Slab SW-flat2.1 700 SB3 / Rio Karma / Laptop - JVC UX-C30 / Sennheiser PX-100 darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Transporter in 2009?
I second the motion for a 24/192 capable Transporter Mini, to use with the Controller and your own choice of DAC. I currently have a Benchmark DAC-1, but would love to audition a Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC. I think the high-res download market will really take off in the next year or so, and Slim/Logitech needs to offer a slimmed down device to be well-positioned for that market. Otherwise, I'll be looking for another audiophile-grade product that fills that niche. -- sleepysurf main system: sb2 (with elpac linear psu) benchmark dac-1 modwright swl 9.0se belles 350a reference ml summits. audience au24e and blue jeans cables. secondary systems: sb3 in master br (russound r235ls amp driving in-ceiling speaker) and game room (powered swan s200a speakers), with boom in home office. sleepysurf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57677 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Sound issue, Duet. Will an external DAC help?
Yes. Highly recommended. I've been using one with my CD player and now run the Duet through it. Big difference compared to the Duet on its own. Sound and volume compare favorably to the CD. -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61755 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
I've been using Duet for a couple months, playing the the gain settings. Most of my tracks (AAC MP3) have been tagged using iGain or MP3Gain (which use the same standard). Does the Replay/Smart feature read what's already tagged, or does it act on its own, ignoring any previous file processing? Or does it add additional reduction/gains (as I saw on one post). Based on this, how is the volume adjustment figure (under More Information) calculated? Thanks in advance for any information. Looks like somebody on this forum has the knowledge to set me straight. -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410825 Wrote: Based on this, how is the volume adjustment number in More Information calculated? Everything comes from the tags. Squeezecenter does not (by default) do any extra processing, nor does it write anything to your files. -- SuperQ SuperQ's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2139 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
SuperQ;410833 Wrote: Everything comes from the tags. Squeezecenter does not (by default) do any extra processing, nor does it write anything to your files. Thanks for the reply SuperQ. I appreciate the information. This leads me back to my other question as to why the displayed number is always a greater reduction than is tagged by MP3/iGain. This difference is audible in the actual volume, sound quality and dynamic range. Any ideas? -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
Discussions like this tend to generate more heat than light. Perceptions are personal. Views can differ. -- Goodsounds Goodsounds's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=14201 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Moonbase;410501 Wrote: Suggestion to at least -check- against badly encoded files and/or RG tools that deliver incredible values: (I actually also use another method: From time to time I generate master playlists on my whole collection that also spit out some special playlists like -_!_Duplicate-Tags.m3u, _!_No-Cover.m3u, _!_No-OrigYear.m3u, _!_No-RG-Album.m3u, _!_No-RG-Track.m3u- and so on. Thus, I can have any erroneous files detected automatically, and neatly packed into a playlist for later diagnosis.) All this of course requires some time (Mp3tag -will- be -slow- when loading 50,000 tracks!) but you usually have to do it only once. (And probably while checking in a new album.) How do you do the specialty playlists? With mp3tag? Sounds like something I'd like to try to do. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410835 Wrote: Thanks for the reply SuperQ. I appreciate the information. This leads me back to my other question as to why the displayed number is always a greater reduction than is tagged by MP3/iGain. This difference is audible in the actual volume, sound quality and dynamic range. Any ideas? There's 'track gain' and 'album gain', are you comparing like with like? -- 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=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
My main problem with DBT is that it only gives one a snapshot of the sound of the components being tested. By snapshot I mean a very small sampling of the musical spectrum, a one or two minute long snippet of music rather than an overview of how the components may or may not differ when playing other types of music. So if the snippet of music being used in the test contains only strings then the components may appear to sound identical but if the musical snippet had contained a full orchestra perhaps the components would sound different. Another problem with DBT pertains to the synergy between various audio components. Sure there are many people who may scoff at the mere notion of synergy between components but it does exist and can have an enormous effect on the overall sound of an audio system. Bad synergy can make a good piece of equipment sound mediocre whereas good synergy can make a component really sing. With all that being said I still don't know who is worse off: the Subjectivists with their often needlessly expensive equipment, especially cables, interconnects and power cords or the Objectivists with their lossy compressed files and class D power amps. All too often the whole thing turns out to be a lose-lose rather than win-win situation. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter - Transporter 2 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
El Duderino;409346 Wrote: I was simply asking if using the XLR outputs influences the volume. Priceless reply. But I don't think anyone answered your actual question. You should expect XLR outputs to be +6 dB above RCA connections. In addition, but more variably, -nominal- line level between RCA (consumer) and XLR balanced (professional) can vary up to 12-14 dB. Maximum levels differ as well. Its variable because not all vendors implement it the same way, unfortunately. Further insight for SB3/Tp is available on the 'ConnectToPowerAmp' (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/ConnectToPowerAmp) wiki page. So level matching with a sound meter as you have done is critical for testing, and you should not expect equal settings on the two devices for different connection types. -- Eric Carroll Transporter-Pass Labs X2.5-Bel Canto Evo6 Gen II-Paradigm Signature S8 SB3-Bryston 3B SST-Paradigm Reference Studio 60 v.4 SB3-Kingrex T20-Paradigm Reference Studio 20 v.4 Eric Carroll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9293 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61686 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
El Duderino;409594 Wrote: I do feel that they are revealing enough that one would expect to see some sort of an improvement between the Transporter vs. SB3. On the other hand, perhaps, it does take $5000 speakers to hear a difference... You might find this thread interesting: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35068 -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61686 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] To pre or not to pre
jaysung;410341 Wrote: That is the question. Directly into main amps or have you got a pre? Why? Ok, 2 of 3 of my systems go direct, one uses a preamp. The preamp is for selecting between multiple analog sources becuase I didn't want to use the DACs of the home theater surround sound processor for music - I like the Transporter better. Also, the Transporter XLR output does not have built in attenuation, so the preamp helps to match system gain, since I use XLR on the Tp for a better noise floor. If you want to go direct, check out the 'ConnectToPowerAmp' (http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/ConnectToPowerAmp) wiki page, which outlines most of the issues/questions/concerns/justifications for attenuation. -- Eric Carroll Transporter-Pass Labs X2.5-Bel Canto Evo6 Gen II-Paradigm Signature S8 SB3-Bryston 3B SST-Paradigm Reference Studio 60 v.4 SB3-Kingrex T20-Paradigm Reference Studio 20 v.4 Eric Carroll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9293 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61821 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Patrick Dixon;410849 Wrote: There's 'track gain' and 'album gain', are you comparing like with like? I use smart gain to differentiate between playlists and albums. Are you saying there could be different results? -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Patrick Dixon;410849 Wrote: There's 'track gain' and 'album gain', are you comparing like with like? The dynamic range of the actual music should not be affected as both the high and low are changed the same. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410835 Wrote: Thanks for the reply SuperQ. I appreciate the information. This leads me back to my other question as to why the displayed number is always a greater reduction than is tagged by MP3/iGain. This difference is audible in the actual volume, sound quality and dynamic range. Any ideas? The dynamic range of the actual music should not be affected as both the high and low are changed the same. Try turning the volume up. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410855 Wrote: I use smart gain to differentiate between playlists and albums. Are you saying there could be different results? With track gain each song has a different volume gain, with album gain every song on the album will have the same volume gain to preserve the original intent of the producer. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
The Blind Testing Controversy There is nothing controversial about blind testing. There is a small groups of audiophiles, plus a few other groups, that have wish to believe in magic more strongly than they wish to believe in science. Since these groups offer nothing in support of rejecting the scientific method other than their dislike of the results there is nothing on which to base a controversy. We all get to choose whether to believe in science or magic and there is nothing controversial about any resulting conflict because the systems of belief are different. The Objectivist typically considers that to allow oneself to be influenced by these other factors is some kind of character flaw. I suspect your Objectivist group might be negligible in size. I cannot recall a posting from someone opposing Subjectivists on these grounds. Can you provide an example or two? What I have seen is lots of opposition to subjectivists making incorrect statements about objective matters due to their belief system. Subjectivists generally believe their perceptions follow from the sound field being changed by an amount their ears are picking up and project this onto audiophile equipment. -- honestguv honestguv's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13734 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
cliveb;410749 Wrote: The Objectivist typically considers that to allow oneself to be influenced by these other factors is some kind of character flaw. While I obviously can't speak for others, I haven't found that characterization to be at all accurate. In I don't think I've ever encountered that view, despite reading more comments on this debate than I care to admit. In my opinion, perceptual bias is simply a fact - it's part of what makes us human beings. In many ways life would be less interesting without it; certainly it would be totally different. Whether it's how you judge people, taste wine, choose a watch - all of that is extremely subjective and personal. And most of the time, that's perfectly OK. It's just that some of the time, it's not OK. For example, no one wants doctors to be influenced by drug companies in their medical judgments. That's why medical studies are very carefully controlled. And another example is when someone advises you to buy some absurdly overpriced component, because without it you won't have a truly revealing system (or something). Advice like that is both financially damaging to the recipient and liable to leave them permanently unsatisfied with their sound system. OK, it's not the end of the world if some well-off middle aged men (the overwhelming majority of audiophiles) waste some money on a silly pursuit. But it's annoying for those of us that really do care about sound quality, and would like to see the field progress towards superior music reproduction. For that - to make progress on what is after all a very difficult engineering challenge - controls are crucial, and the subjective experiences of people are essentially useless (how many great scientific advances were made because some cult insisted on something in the case of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?). The near-total rejection of the recent Meyer-Moran study on SACD versus Redbook is a perfect example - the industry needs to focus on the areas that matter, and stop getting distracted by mysticism and bogus received wisdom. -- opaqueice opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
honestguv;410861 Wrote: Can you provide an example or two? Wait a second... honestguv;410861 Wrote: [...] subjectivists making incorrect statements [...] due to their belief system. Ha! Found one. -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
opaqueice;410870 Wrote: In my opinion, perceptual bias is simply a fact - it's part of what makes us human beings. So is expectation bias. -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
opaqueice;410853 Wrote: You might find this thread interesting: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35068 Wow! I really didn't know that this discussion has been going on for that long! But I'm curios now. I would love to redo a similar test and find out if I could hear a difference or not. I could swear that my plain Duet sounded worse than with an external DAC. To me from the first note on the difference was so obvious I didn't find it necessary to do a blind test. But who knows? Maybe I would fail... -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61686 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
I'm going to do my best. Forgive me if it's not good enough. cliveb;410749 Wrote: The Objectivist seems to take the view that since there is no difference in the detectable soundfield (as evidenced by a blind comparison) Usually I'm not this pedantic, but it seems to make a difference here. Failing to demonstrate a perceptible difference in a double-blind test does NOT mean that the difference can't be perceived! Failing to prove the existence of something is not the same as proving the lack of something. Also, a badly-designed test will give bad results, double-blind or not. Just because A/B audio tests cannot give good results does not mean that ABX (or other double-blind) audio tests always do. Designing a good test is hard, and bad tests of any sort are generally worthless. The Objectivist typically considers that to allow oneself to be influenced by these other factors is some kind of character flaw. Not at all. We just prefer to measure one thing at a time. If we wanted to, we could do a double-blind test of identical audio to show exactly how much influence the brand of the amp had on the perceived sound quality. It's not a character flaw, it's just a variable which could be tested. Most people are interested in sound quality, so we tend to control for that. If you do a test that allows multiple factors to influence perception, then it's difficult-to-impossible to sort out how much each factor contributed. Again, it all boils down to designing a good test. They therefore draw the conclusion that the difference heard is not down to any such external factors, but must be due to some problem with the blind comparison methodology that prevents the differences being detected. And I absolutely agree. Any tester should thoroughly document their methodology so that others can pick it apart and even re-test with any identified flaws removed. This is NOT the same thing as your test didn't give the results I though it should have, therefore there must be something wrong with it. You have to actually identify the flaw and how to fix it. Why not just accept the fact that external factors do modify what we hear, and it is human nature that it does so? It's only reasonable that the satisfaction in operating an exquisitely finished CD player will enhance the listening experience. There's no shame in it. I'm with you there. I'm an objectivist and I like bling. Objectivists should stop telling people they are deluding themselves when they hear a difference, and Subjectivists should stop insisting that the difference they hear can't be down to these external factors. I think the schism will remain, despite your best efforts. People like certainty (especially when spending lots of money), you can't have certainty without people making definitive statements, and you can't have definitive statements without testing. There are fundamental differences about what qualifies as a valid test. For example, I've seen some exquisitely designed nonblind audio tests. But they're nonblind, and therefore worthless, but subjectivists love them anyway. Then there's PC ABX tests, which make double-blind testing so easy you can get results without having any idea how to do a perception test. Also, typically worthless, but pseudo-objectivists love them anyway. That's the tension. People want answers. Tests give answers. Most tests are bad tests and give wrong answers, but people don't care about that so much, because what they really want is justification. -- CatBus CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Nonreality;410859 Wrote: The dynamic range of the actual music should not be affected as both the high and low are changed the same. Try turning the volume up. Turning up the volume does help on older, less dynamic recordings. Thanks. I'm still curious about what affects the volume leveling has on tracks both with and w/o tags. I have newly added tracks, both AAC and MP3, that haven't been tagged. However, with volume adjustment turned on at the remote (track or album gain), there is both a calculated adjustment under More info and an audible one for the untagged tracks. By default, this shouldn't happen. Anyone care to discuss? -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Nonreality;410860 Wrote: With track gain each song has a different volume gain, with album gain every song on the album will have the same volume gain to preserve the original intent of the producer. Yes, I understand that's the reason for both settings. Thanks. But I'm still curious on the actual functioning of volume leveling, as noted in my previous post. Any ideas? -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
If you use mp3gain you can apply gain setting to the actual track without the use of tags. The changes the music so that you can use replay gain on devices that do not support replay gain. I've never used it because I don't want it to be permanent. I guess you can change them back but I just never wanted to fool with it. Could this be what you are hearing? You can do the same thing with mediamonkey and dbpoweramp and probably other programs but I feel the tag method is much better. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
Nonreality;410898 Wrote: If you use mp3gain you can apply gain setting to the actual track without the use of tags. The changes the music so that you can use replay gain on devices that do not support replay gain. I've never used it because I don't want it to be permanent. I guess you can change them back but I just never wanted to fool with it. Could this be what you are hearing? You can do the same thing with mediamonkey and dbpoweramp and probably other programs but I feel the tag method is much better. The original intent, as you indicated, was to use MP3gain for playback on iPods, which of course don't support tags. But that was before Duet! Given that MP3/iGain act on the file itself, I would like to know what affect that has on volume playing back through SC and the Duet. Based on your description, the files as played through Duet should already be volume-leveled, so I am in fact hearing a doubled action. Do I have this right? -- chitunes chitunes's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29148 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
I just have to point at this paper: http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/short/83/6/3548 What do 'objectivists' (I think I am one) say to these results? Bad design? Sorry if this is old stuff. I find it rather interesting. -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Smart Gain
chitunes;410901 Wrote: The original intent, as you indicated, was to use MP3gain for playback on iPods, which of course don't support tags. But that was before Duet! Given that MP3/iGain act on the file itself, I would like to know what affect that has on volume playing back through SC and the Duet. Based on your description, the files as played through Duet should already be volume-leveled, so I am in fact hearing a doubled action. Do I have this right? Yes exactly if you also have replay gain tags on a track that has already been volume leveled by mp3tag. In that case I would not use any replay gain in SC. -- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60836 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] The Blind Testing Controversy
Quad;410902 Wrote: I just have to point at this paper: http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/short/83/6/3548 What do 'objectivists' (I think I am one) say to these results? Bad design? Sorry if this is old stuff. I find it rather interesting. My experience with PET scans is nil, so I may be missing some obvious issues. The first thing is I'm not seeing anything about detecting or preventing the audible interference patterns that can be generated from ultrasonic sounds. Maybe that's not the point of this study, but if it's not then they're not breaking any new ground. Also, the link between detectable brain activity and perceptible sounds doesn't sound solid (again, I'm not sure this was a goal of their test so I can't fault them for it). Certainly they went through some trouble making subjects sit still and avoid visual stimulation during the test, but more things stimulate the brain that just that. Did subjects have caffeine in their systems? Stomach discomfort? Did they get bored in the scanner and start thinking about Hawaii? Would any of that have shown up on the scans? The PET scans showed that the brain was doing stuff, but is that stuff hearing? Or is the subject just going over their shopping list? If they are certain that the parts of the brain they're scanning are exclusively responsible for hearing, then why did they bother making the room dark? That sort of thing. Could be a good test or a bad test. I'm just not sure it's an applicable test. -- CatBus CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=61877 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
