Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
Julf wrote: I am sure you are aware that some people can very easily identify even high-bitrate MP3 from lossless. The reason is damaged hearing in certain frequency ranges that prevents the masking that the mp3 codec is counting on from working. There is no better way to explain doublethink. Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
Julf wrote: That a hearing defect prevents something that makes assumptions about your hearing from working? It is possible that my ability to discern MP3 from FLAC is because of a hearing defect. In theory that really is a valid reason that makes complete sense to me and when this assumption first came up I honestly found it to be quite creative. Critical thinking is always good and you can't take it too far. (Btw. could you please point me to the scientific paper which intentionally included hearing impaired participants for a data reduction test with music?) But you can apply critical thinking in both ways. Let's take the proven and known facts about auditory memory. According to those insights it is not possible to remember sonic events for longer than a couple of seconds. Fair enough, but what about emotional memory? Music has always been and will always be about emotions (except maybe for minimal music). What if you are able to remember a specific emotional state rather than the sonics itself? It is proven that emotional experiences leave strong traces in the brain. This is just hypothetically spoken, I don't want to claim anything on that topic. All people are removing cognitive dissonances with brain acrobatics the same way that all humans are accessible to placebo effects. I do and you do. Sometimes it is very hard to discern that from critical thinking. But hey, I thanked you! Please read my initial post again. Cheers Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
garym wrote: Regarding ABX'ng high bit rate mp3 from FLAC, I recall that report and certainly believe you. There are many instances of this across people *on certain killer tracks/samples* (e.g., harpsichord music). The question I have (and I'm serious here, not trying to kick up a fuss) is whether you've done something like this with say, 20 or so different tracks with some diversity. That is, not killer samples but tracks from different CDs, different types of music (classical, jazz, pop, etc.). Although it is not unusual to be able to ABX *certain mp3 from FLAC files, it would be highly unusual to be able to consistently ABX FLAC from high bit rate mp3 across a broader sampling of music files. Back then I tested multiple tracks out of three CDs with different genres. On two of them I could discern the original from the data reduced version. With Pop and Jazz it was possible to do so with statistic significance, the Pop-one even on a significance level of 1 percent. Surprisingly my choice for classical music wasn't discernable. I don't own any harpsichord solo records. What a dull instrument IMHO. No dynamics at all by design! That's why harpsichord recordings often sound extremely loud, you don't have to compress anything. After one or two tracks I always have to switch. :-) But let's leave the odd and wore down MP3/FLAC battle behind us. Don't you think that claims like only-the-heraing-impaired-can-discern is a perfect example of how people deal with cognitive dissonances? Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
garym wrote: Thanks for the explanation re your ABX tests. I don't think anyone was saying that discerning differences is 100% correlated with hearing impairment. That is just one known explanation for why lossy files don't work for some people. Julf was just pointing out an alternative hypothesis (i.e., that passing ABX tests doesn't necessarily mean the subject has 'golden ears'). And without cognitive dissonance, a heck of a lot of consumer products companies will be out of business (audio, TV, clothing, autos, etc.). It drives a lot of things about human behavior. But heck, I rip all my CDs to FLAC and I can't even ABX a 192k mp3 from the lossless file across any number of different files. Too many loud rock concerts in the 1960s/70s I'm sure. :cool: Me too, I'm ripping to FLAC for convenience like Pablo stated. For everyday-listening, 192k is way enough to give you full audiophile joy. The differences I could hear were not where I expected them. It took me some training to listen to the specific artefacts. If the only way of delivering digital music was MP3 I wouldn't bother with vinyl and the like. And yes, Julf's signature is quite right. To judge the real from the false will always be hard. I hate marketing, to some degree it is a necessary evil. Why can't humans just objectively find out for themselves what's good and what's not? Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
SBGK wrote: squeezelite sounds pretty awful out of the box, have you tried jlp which is a modified portaudio/squeezelite. HDMI into the m51 is not the best either, better results from say a J Kenny Cuinas + coax or mf vlink 192 aes/ebu. I guess you got win 2012 via msdn otherwise how do you justify £600 on an O/s + £100 for the optimiser. The problem with HDMI is that it's designed for encrypted signals so there is a bit of processing going on which can be heard in comparison to sp/dif, AES/EBU. Squeezelite out of the box sounds better to me than a Touch. And for my M51 (unquestionable at them moment from a budget point of view) a HDMI connection is the best option (compared to the alternatives I've tried). You can get an evaluation version of Server 2012 for free. It's valid for 180 days and you can extend that several times. The 100 bucks for the AudiophileOptimizer is not much. You can easily spend that in one evening for a decent dinner and a visit to a theatre. I will try your modified squeezelite called JLP. What did you change? Server/Storage: Synology 412+ - LMS 7.7.2 Living Room: Windows Server 2012 R2 (core) - AudiophileOptimizer - Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Controller: iPad mini - iPeng 7 Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
Quad wrote: I will try your modified squeezelite called JLP. What did you change? Couldn't make it to work. The modified squeezelite crashes. Server/Storage: Synology 412+ - LMS 7.7.2 Living Room: Windows Server 2012 R2 (core) - AudiophileOptimizer - Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Controller: iPad mini - iPeng 7 Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
ralphpnj wrote: What I find very interesting is that the path that Quad appears to have taken out of the land of audiophilia is very similar to the paths that many of us have followed. I find that once one begins to question the Golden Eared Gods of the high end audio publications (or as I like to call them - the clowns), for whatever reason - mine was their apparent misunderstanding of the basics of digital audio - then many other audiophile beliefs soon fall to the wayside. One of the biggest mistakes I feel that is being made by the Golden Eared Gods is that they all too often mistake measured differences for audible differences. So for example when measured one type of connection may have slightly more jitter than another but the jitter in either connection cannot be heard any human. So while the two connections may measure differently they are functionally equal. The 16 bit versus 24 bit argument is very similar in that while 24 bit provides for greater dynamic range, that increased dynamic range means virtually nothing for over 99.999% of all recorded music, in other words 16 bits has more than enough dynamic range for the task. You're totally right. 16 or 24 bits is not audible. That's the wrong way of trying to improve sound quality. On the other hand I can't help myself hearing differences between bit perfect playback alternatives. I cannot hear differences between digital cables but my USB input sounds clearly different from my coax or HDMI input. One may state that the inputs have to be somehow corrupt or this might all be because of psychological reasons. Well, it's not possible for me to compare them in an ABX setting. The same goes for OS tuning. For me the difference is there. And IMHO it's a bigger issue than MP3. It's not as easy as more details, bigger sound stage and more dynamics. The whole accoustic impression seems to be more stable, more relaxed. It's hard to describe it without sounding like TAS or Wine Spectator. But all sources benefit from that, be it MP3 or FLAC. I don't know what it is? Maybe it is the placebo only and in a couple of month I will laugh at myself. But it's still fun to experiment. Server/Storage: Synology 412+ - LMS 7.7.2 Living Room: Windows Server 2012 R2 (core) - AudiophileOptimizer - Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Controller: iPad mini - iPeng 7 Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
Mnyb wrote: The classical way to underestimate the power of perceptionall bias is to find things so obviusly better that you don't need a controlled test ;) in that moment you prove two things . You don't get this bias/placebo thing and you do really need a controlled test. So true. Server/Storage: Synology 412+ - LMS 7.7.2 Living Room: Windows Server 2012 R2 (core) - AudiophileOptimizer - Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Controller: iPad mini - iPeng 7 Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
ralphpnj wrote: I always find it amusing how audiophiles tend to have a this giant double standard with respect to measurements, e.g. tubes measure poorly but sound wonderful whereas non-asynchronous USB has slightly more (inaudible) jitter than asynchronous USB so non-asynchronous USB must be bad. Go figure. Mnyb wrote: So measurements matters if they support audiophile folklore , if it doesn't it is tossed away . I remember a review of an audio device in one of these advertising magazines (forgot what it was, who made it and who reviewed it). Jitter measurements were incredible and the producer admitted he was not looking at that detail because he trusted his ears. Funny enough the review was very positive. The device was around 20k or so. You can add: Measurement matters if they support audiophile folklore, if it doesn't or if it is expensive enough it is tossed away. Server/Storage: Synology DS412+ - LMS 7.7.2 Living Room: Windows Server 2012 R2 (core) - AudiophileOptimizer - Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Controller: iPad mini - iPeng 7 Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone used this... AudiophileOptimizer
Deaf Cat wrote: Hi, Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just wondered? http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html cheers DC Hi Deaf Cat IMHO it is well worth a try. My vanilla LMS is running on a Synology NAS. For playback I recently turned an older notebook into a dedicated music player. Just install Windows Server 2012 R2 Evaluation in core mode, run AudiophileOptimizer and launch Squeezeplay with your favourite output. To me it sounds clearly better than Windows 8 without any adjustments. Within AudiophileOptimizer you can choose between different Sound Signatures and Digital Filters. There is also the possibility to compare them to the standard Windows settings. This is a good way to experience differences you can achieve with OS tuning. Of course all the modes are still bit perfect... Oupps, I might have just stirred up a hornet's nest... Sting me, I really need that. :-) Cheers Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=100440 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone used this... AudiophileOptimizer
aubuti wrote: Or even grokked the more general difference between a network music _server_ (eg, LMS) and a network music _player_ (eg, Squeezeplay on a laptop) The initial post asked about any experience with that tool in a slimdevices setup. That's what I answered to by giving some details in which context my experience took place. What's wrong with that? But of course fair reactions were beyond hope. :-) Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=100440 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Thank you
Maybe I should see a doctor. I always try to be loved by everyone. :-) I think it is time to say thank you to some of the forum members who constantly point out scientific arguments against audiophile myths. This saved me money and energy. Here is what I stopped doing because of you: - Buying expensive RCA cables. While I can't say they all sound the same to me, the price rarely correlates with my joy listening to them. Some surprisingly cheap but solid cables subjectively often beat their highly praised and expensive counterparts. - Buying hi-res stuff. Some of my all-time favorite recordings are standard 44.1/16bit. No need and no possibility to improve (eg some re-masters by MFSL). On the other hand there are quite a few hi-res recordings that are a rip off (eg Hotel California, Come Away With Me, Supernatural, Rumours,...). And on top of all, some of my all-time favorite music is recorded quite poorly anyway. And I still love it. - I didn't and I will not hop on the DSD train. Basically for the same reasons as above. And ironically, those labels who offer DSD are often the ones that already care about sound quality. For these recordings the difference is minimal if any. And for those companies who don't care it's worthless to buy their recordings in DSD anyway. - I gave up on JPlay. It's not worth the effort. Its most purist setting asks you to manually drag drop music files into their player. Then you have to wait a couple of seconds or even minutes to let them be loaded into memory. Finally your computer goes into hibernate mode and you can start listening. No seeking, no browsing, no cover art, no multi-room. This is a complete and obsolete anachronism in the age of music streaming. It is almost the same royal PITA as vinyl, but without the nostalgia. And it doesn't sound better to me, there is no reason why it should. Cheers PS: But remember, I passed a properly designed ABX test for MP3@320kbs vs. FLAC with a recording I own physically, ripped and converted by myself. I would be more than happy to reproduce the result for you at any time. Sorry couldn't resist. :-) Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101084 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Anyone used this... AudiophileOptimizer
aubuti wrote: Nothing's wrong with that, just not particularly germane when it's obvious from subsequent posts that Deaf Cat was talking about using Audiophile Optimizer to tweak a server computer that is streaming to physical Squeezeboxes (SB2 and a Touch). I suppose you should get credit for presenting the very different use case of laptop as network player, a case in which the AO software could actually make a conceivable difference. Actually I searched the forum for the term AudiophileOptimizer, saw the thread and the usual answers and decided to reply directly to the original post. Maybe I should have read the whole thread more carefully. Living Room: Squeezelite - WDM-KS/HDMI - NAD M51 (Rowen Swiss Edition) - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 22L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=100440 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Humor in latest TAS
I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl (order is not important) Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke? Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority can't. Many tests have proven this. But I can. Here I stand; I can do none other (double blind tested, I promise). So what's wrong with my system? (My library is in FLAC and I stream as FLAC.) Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98630 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Humor in latest TAS
ralphpnj wrote: I haven't had a Coke or Diet Coke in over 30 years so I don't care because as far as I'm concerned they are both poison. True, that's why I'm listening to classical music. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98630 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Humor in latest TAS
garym wrote: but a FLAC, ALAC, WAV, etc file are all decoded to the same bits as they enter the DAC. A diet coke and regular coke are NOT bit perfect (my chemistry colleagues can tell me how the makeup is NOT identical). We may not typically be able to tell a difference, but if we can tell a difference there is at least a plausible reason (they are not in fact identical products as they enter our body). Don't take the analogy too far. But yes, you're right, it's different. Me for myself I am unable to hear a difference between FLAC and WAV. But I can hear differences between HDMI and USB outputs with otherwise identical variables. They are both bit perfect. I can't give you a plausible reason. The reason I was chiming in was that no matter what anyone tells about differences in the digital domain, a handful of kamikaze pilots immediately talks them down. The same who will tell you that it is not possible to discern different modern DACs. Which - with all my respect - is complete BS. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98630 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] New Humor in latest TAS
Archimago wrote: BTW, what did they do to the NAD to make it Rowen Swiss? Basically they replaced the analogue output circuit with Mundorf gear. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98630 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
SBGK wrote: If you are into experimenting with players then you should try my free c++ minimalist wasapi player - MQn, it is absolutely stripped down and optimised to produce the best sound possible, requires 64 bit intel and 64 bit windows 7 or 8. I used it with hdmi to my nad m51, but now use usb 2.0 mf vlink 192 to nad m51 via aes/ebu. https://rapidshare.com/#users|459800...a4b6194c|11541 have a look at the readme file for info, there is no install, just download the files and play music. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/visual-studio-2012-c-and-wasapi-minimalist-player-15401/index3.html You will not have heard anything like it. can play wav or flac. I tried squeezelite, but found the port audio implementation not to be high enough quality, to be expected as it is not built with sound quality in mind. I have received feedback that it blows away mpdpup which is supposed to be a standard for low noise players. Hi SBKG I tried your player and it sounds really good. MQn/WASAPI/HDMI definitely sounds better than foobar/WASAPI/HDMI. The difference between MQn/WASAPI/HDMI and Squeezelite/KS/HDMI is very subtle (to me, on my system). And I'm not sure yet which one I prefer from a sound quality perspective. But given the abilities of a fully functional Squeezebox, I'll stay with Squeezelite for now. Squeezelite is the only player I know which is able to address my KS/HDMI drivers. This makes it impossible to compare with other players. And I can't really try USB due to a lack of a quality cable. Everything I've listened to sounds inferior to HDMI (with my DAC). Keep on the good work! Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
SoftwireEngineer wrote: Archimago has done some great work on testing for differences in jitter. Now all we need is a get together and do some blind testing whenever there is even a slight difference in jitter. I would love doing this! I invite you all to come over to my place for an afternoon blind testing session. I'm serious, this could be fun. (Although, an afternoon just listening to music with my current system might be even more fun.) ;-) Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
I hate doing this. I'm afraid of the reactions. Be nice to me ;-) After being able to discern FLAC and MP3 @ 320kbps I digged a bit more into my assumed securities. Despite proven bit-perfectness, different digital sources indeed sound different. I have done some extended blind listening during the past few days. I don't understand why, but even software players and streaming methods sound different. ASIO, WASAPI, Kernel Streaming with USB or HDMI: everything is different. In my setup, Squeezelite with Kernel Streaming over HDMI out of my Windows 8 laptop into my NAD M51 sounds the best. The difference between this setup and a plain Touch-SPDIF connection is not subtle at all, a LOT bigger than FLAC vs. MP3. Honestly I wasn't too much into this audiophile thing. I was quite happy with my average but decent CD transport until I bought my first Squeezebox a couple of years ago. Because of intelligent and helpful people in this forum, I didn't question the sound quality of a Squeezebox. Everyone kept telling and explaining everybody that a Touch is true audiophile gear, which is not possible to be inferior than any big-bucks voodoo digital source. Shortly after I stored all my CD's in the basement, I started being unsatisfied with my listening experiences. The consequence was an upgrade of my music chain: pre-amp, power-amp, speakers, cables. I spent a lot of money and didn't spend a minute to question the Touch as a source of my problems. Anyway, I'm glad there is Squeezelite now. I love the LMS architecture, iPeng and all the plugins. I can use my Radio for the bedroom, the touch for the living room and Squeezelite for the real thing. Unlike others, my experience with serious blind testing was not humbling, quite the opposite. I strongly encourage everyone to do tests like this for themselves. Don't trust anyone but yourself. Be it audiophools or radical rationalists. I didn't say 'trust your ears', that certainly is not enough. But trust your own empirical observations, which have to include some kind of objectivisation. cheers Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Wombat wrote: To be honest i really have a problem finding a reasonable reason for a beahviour that creates such an effect described. There comes me some tape pre-echo to mind you could hear back in the good old days :) Me neither, I can't find a reasonable reason. I don't like that. Of course the effect is very subtle, not comparable to seconds of tape pre-echo. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
I still don't have an optical cable. But I A-B-testet: - Touch - coax - M51 - foobar - HDMI - M51 The M51 has one volume control for all inputs and I couldn't measure the db-level due to the lack of a pressure meter. While these are not optimal double blind conditions, it still is a controlled straight forward instantaneous A-B test. My wife switched sources for me. Unfortunately I can't post a log, but differences are there, easier to identify than FLAC vs. 320kbps. What could be the reasons for that? I really want to know. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Archimago wrote: Hard to say Quad. What is the difference you're hearing? What's the setup for the HDMI - off a graphics card, motherboard? What computer are you using? I presume there's no sample rate conversion, ReplayGain, or anything like that going on in foobar as garym suggested... I don't know if any HDMI interface has ASIO to insure bit-accurate output without going through an internal resampler, dithering, and volume control. DirectSound IMO *always* messes up the output - easily demonstrated when I do jitter tests. As you probably know, there's been some talk about jitter for HDMI on some gear being in the multiple-nanosecond range (I think the M51 should be much better but who knows how the computer-DAC interface functions in this regard). Stereophile measurements look very good but they didn't bother checking the HDMI interface. I presume the Touch is at 100% volume, no transcoding/bit rate limiting/server resampling. Here's something you can also try once you get a TosLink cable - connect BOTH of the Touch's coaxial and TosLink to the M51 and verify if the interfaces sound the same through the same player before connecting the CDP vs. Touch. I still think an SPL meter is important to make sure volume differences isn't creeping into the evaluation. It's hard to describe the difference in words. I will necessarily sound like always But I'll give it a try. In favor of the Touch: - PC sounds somehow thinner - Touch is somehow warmer In favor of the PC: - sounds more effortless - harsh recording passages have less ringing (piano, violin) - less fatiguing My hardware is an Intel HD 3000 with HDMI out (integrated into Sandy Bridge processor). And as far as I can remember WASAPI is the bit-perfect Windows alternative to ASIO (Steinberg). I get the same results if connected through USB and WASAPI. There is no processing involved, neither on LMS nor on foobar. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
I'll try to put it in another way. If played on the Touch, a piano attack sounds like if the the upper-mids and treble appear first. After that first sound impression, the mids and bass (and with that the sound stage) will be audible. Played on PC, everything is together on time leading to a less 'compressed' experience. Does that sound familiar to anyone? Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Or explained as a consequence. On the Touch I have to listen with higher volumes in order to achieve a nice sound stage, because it is somehow overshadowed by upper-mids and treble. With louder passages, this can lead to a slightly screaming impression. While on the PC, on low and high volumes sound stage is perfect from the beginning of the note. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Which one sounds better - Windows or Linux?
F...and of course I responded by calling the product pure BS and of course I was dismissed with some typical audiophile mumbo jumbo... What goes around, comes around. Don't get me wrong, this laminar thing is marketing fuzz at its worst. But I really think you guys sometimes overdo. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98298 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Here's a first log of this morning. Not quite as good as yesterday, but still obvious. I'm somehow flabbergasted. +---+ |Filename: Roll.txt | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14665| +---+ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Archimago wrote: That's pretty good Quad. Wondering what settings/program you used for MP3 encoding? I have that album so will have a good listen to the song myself... LAME 3.99.5 within foobar. For settings refer to the attachment. The piano intro was easiest for me to distinguish between the two versions. It was easier when I started over the track again and again for ABXY. +---+ |Filename: settings.jpg | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14666| +---+ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Here's another one. Harder but possible. It is the infamous recording that caused discussions in the version of HDTracks. I own the redbook version. +---+ |Filename: Concerto.txt | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14667| +---+ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Even harder, but still discernible. The original here is 24/192 while the MP3 is 24/48, downsampled with the built-in foobar SRC. I might hear the donwsampling algorithm and not the codec. +---+ |Filename: Sor.txt | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14668| +---+ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: Aha. You're interpreting the test results incorrectly. (You must be thinking that a high percentage is good...in fact a high percentage means something very different here) The log you posted indicates that you can't distinguish between the lossy and lossess tracks. You would want to see a % (p-value) of, say, 5% or less. But I'd be impressed with even 10% or less. bottom line, the results you posted indicate that you can't distinguish between the lossy and lossless file.More info on interpreting the ABX test here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295 a little on p-values and testing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value Hmm... Did you have a look at all 3 logs I posted? The first two have a p-value of 5.5% and the last one 24%. I'm not sure if those percentages are indicating the p-value though. But 5.5% means, 8 out of 10 were guessed correctly. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: And without getting two bogged down in statistics, when one runs multiple tests, the p-values have to be adjusted to account for this. (think of the idea that one asserts he can correctly predict heads or tails in a coin flip 10 times in a row. If one runs this test enough times, eventually in one of the tests, the subject will be able to predict heads/tails 10 times in a row. Ok, I tested the same track as this morning again. This time I tried to be more focused and clicked the answer only when I was really sure. Is a p-value of 1.1% in the second shot enough to eliminate the doubts on the first with 5.5%? I suspect that it could be so easy for me to judge this track because I'm playing the piano myself. Probably I know how to listen to it. And there is nothing hi-res here. No matter how you treat a piano (if your aim still is music making), there is not much left above 12kHz. And on top of all, I created this last log on my laptop's headphone out with a standard Sennheiser in-ear plug. There are other tracks where I gloriously fail. But nevertheless, I never thought that I would be able to distinguish FLAC and 320kbps. Honestly I was a bit afraid that I wouldn't. Now I'm happy and - at least under certain circumstances - I do hear a difference. Maybe I should see a doc concerning this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome ;-) +---+ |Filename: Roll2.txt| |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14671| +---+ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: seems clear that you can distinguish well with this track. But you yourself have noted why this might be the case for this particular track. There have always been problem tracks that people can tell differences in. And by problem track I just mean a track with something unusual that makes it easy to tell or with harpsichords, etc.. This is why testing with real music, multiple tracks, and multiple genres is always a good idea. edit: not that harpsichords aren't real music (or your own playing is not real music). ;-) You're perfectly right. If someone wants to test if people in general can benefit from FLAC for the majority of music, then my tests are useless. For an answer to this question Archimago's blog is pretty clear about that. But my personal null hypothesis was: Under no circumstances I'm able to hear any difference between FLAC and 320kbps on a properly converted radio-friendly track. For this case, the null hypothesis has to be rejected. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Archimago wrote: True, he can distinguish the 2 tracks based on the ABX results, but as far as I can tell, there are still too many unanswered questions... As I suggested above, MP3 needs to be tested on CD data, not hi-res input shoe-horned into a lossy encoder after SRC and bit-depth reduction. Also, I didn't know that There Is Always One More Time is available as 24/192. Is there a DVD-A out there? I have posted 4 ABX logs so far. No. 1 and 4 are done with Roll, Roll, Roll. But no. 2 is a track from a Händel Organ Concerto and no.3 is a guitar tune by Fernando Sor. Just the last one was hi-res. The others were all 16/44 for Flac and MP3. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: Ah. Ok. So to clarify, if we ignore the hires downsample track, you tested 3 tracks and on two of them you were able to distinguish based on ABX test. Correct? Exactly. Not more and not less. garym wrote: I agree. There are people with uniquely good* hearing for these sorts of things and you appear to be one of them. (And you've documented this with ABX tests, unlike the many other audiophiles that simply assume they have really good hearing/revealing systems without doing any blind testing!) *or bad in the sense that as posted elsewhere, in some cases actual problems with hearing can make the listener better able to distinguish lossy from lossless. I actually like the assumption posted in that other blog. If a codec thinks something is overshadowed by other frequencies and decides to eliminate that, this might just work for the average (good) ear. As soon as the the information which supposedly should be dominant is longer audible, we might have a problem. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
Archimago wrote: Good post Quad. Don't worry, I don't think in general the folks here are mean spirited over a hobby :-) Nice summary list. Good to see you've gone over a number of possibilities and listened for yourself. I'm 41 now and over the years have tried a few of the tests and measurements as well. Something I've run into frequently has been the importance of test methodology. For example, there were times when a group of guys got together to listen to 2 speaker cables and everyone seem to agree that Cable A is better than Cable B, but the moment someone switches it and the test becomes 'single blinded', that effect is gone. Likewise, testing DAC's, the moment we introduce controls like making sure the volume is 0.25dB between the two units, there's no way any of us can tell the difference in an A-B test between decent solid state DAC's. Since you mentioned you haven't tried double blind testing, why not do just a controlled straight forward 'instantaneous' A-B with the Touch vs. NAD 514 into the M51? - NAD 514 -- coaxial -- M51 - Touch -- optical -- M51 - Get a pink noise test tone and use a sound pressure meter (like the Radio Shack one) to make sure the two sources are about the same dB (should be if bit perfect unless M51 has independent volume controls for each input) - Go ahead and use the Touch digital volume control to change the volume until the output SPL is 0.25dB different (this will bias against the Touch of course, 100% volume is bit perfect for the Touch) - Play the same album on both the NAD 514 and Touch at the same time. - Flip back and forth between coaxial Toslink (NAD 514 vs. Touch) - does the music sound tonally different from the 2 inputs? Resolution and dynamics differences? Would you or someone sitting with you be able to differentiate the two if blinded to the source of the input? Realize doing this biases against the Touch both in terms of using the digital volume control and TosLink generally has worse jitter. Potentially lots can be talked about but I think the procedure above should be quite straight forward and would be worth doing to test one of the assertions about bit perfection and audibility if you haven't already tried. (If you need to adjust the Touch's volume it would of course not be bit perfect and you would need to ask why the M51 plays digital input at different volumes if this were to happen!) Thanks for your reply Archimago. I will get a TosLink cable and follow your instructions. I really hope I can't reproduce my findings. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
DJanGo wrote: hmm just the idea diff OS (on same Hardware can make a diff sound) is like since i use octane booster on my lawnmower my gras is greener and grows better Just look around in this forum (remember, it's called Audiophile) and you will find lots of posts about differences in OS. But I'm completely with you. This is just impossible to happen. With my list I just wanted to distance myself from the esoteric kind of audiophiles. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
It's a long time ago that I did my last comparisons. And because of the burden of proof I didn't question the transparency of 320kbps. But now I just re-tested. I took 5 tracks I know well and converted them to 320kbps CBR with lame 3.99.5. Then I put the original and the MP3 together in a foobar playlist and let it play randomly. I listened to all of the tracks for a couple of seconds/minutes and and tried identify the MP3s. Result: 10 of 10 were guessed right. Do I have to switch sides now and turn into an esoteric? I'm really confused. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: Impressive. But a better test would be to install the Foobar2000 ABX component and do a regular ABX test. Try it on the same 5 tracks. (In your test, the volume difference (even slight) could explain the ability to pick. The ABX component will control for these things. I just tested 3 of my tracks with the ABX plugin for foobar. 2 of them could easily be assigned within seconds with 100% accuracy. One was a bit harder. As soon as I have some time left I will take these tests a bit further. I didn't expect that, I really didn't. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: Thanks. Interesting. How many trials are you doing (10?). It is true that some songs achieve better transparency that others. So probably it is a good idea to do several (maybe even more than 5 and certainly try different genres). Thanks again for going through the trouble of doing this. (and by the way, are you under 30 or 40? just asking because of high freq hearing and age, etc.) Yes, 10 trials. It's funny that one record - of which I thought I was able to hear a difference - almost failed the test, while another one - which I first doubted to be distinguishable - is quite easy to assign. Both are piano records, but different genres: distinguishable: B.B. King - There is always one more time - 08 - Roll, Roll, Roll (2009) (almost) not distinguishable: Chopin - Maria João Pires - Nocturne No.1 (1996) I will do more, extended tests across genres. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
garym wrote: Excellent, can you paste in the table of the results when you do this, with the p-values. This is more useful that saying failed or passed as there really is no fail or pass, just a p-value on the comparisons (hypothesis being tested). The complete table of the results of the trials is just more informative (I'm not suggesting that you're misleading us, just interested in the details). Thanks. Are p-values and result tables part of the automatically generated ABX log? That's all I can post, I'm not a scientist. Give me some time... Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Differences between digital sources
I've always tried to be an enlightened audiophile. I won't do double blind tests myself because I'm too lazy, but I usually trust those tests and I think they are a good way to find out if something is audible or not. I'm 36 years old and here is what I claim to be able to hear and what I don't: Not audible to me: - LMS running on different OS (Windows, OS X, Linux) - different S/PDIF cables (as long as they meet the specs) - different ethernet cables - TT3 pimping (buffers, WLAN, screen,...) - FLAC vs. WAV - FLAC vs. 320kbps MP3 - 24bit/48kHz vs. higher resolutions (same master, properly downsampled) Audible to me: - RCA cables - speaker cables - power cables and power supplies - differences between DACs - differences between sampling rate conversion algorithms native 192kHz with EDO sounds different than downsampled with SOX to 96kHz (either on-the-fly or not) SACD ripps with different DSD-PCM settings sound different (POW-R3 vs. TPDF) - differences in digital source Touch sounds different than my average CD player NAD 514 (S/PDIF into same external DAC NAD M51) Touch and NAD 514 sound different than Digital Music Player NAD M50 (S/PDIF into same external DAC) HDMI out of my Laptop into same external DAC sounds different again (WASAPI event). What strikes me the most is the last point, differences in digital sources. Are there any good reasons for that? I can't see any. All of them are bit perfect. Unfortunately I can't compare Touch USB vs. Touch S/PDIF. Thank you for a civilized handling of this topic. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] ** High Bit-Rate MP3 Test Up! **
azinck3 wrote: A similar experiment was conducted on a popular programming blog. The introduction: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/06/the-great-mp3-bitrate-experiment.html The results: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/06/concluding-the-great-mp3-bitrate-experiment.html What slightly disqualifiy these results are statements like this: -extremely high degree of statistical confidence barely statistically significant difference- Statistical significance is a zero/one decision. Either it is significant or it is not. You can't tell anything more. Disclaimer: I don't claim to hear a difference between MP3 320kbps and FLAC and I'm looking forward to Archimago's Musings. Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97530 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Here we go I thought I am the ultimate smart ass. Then I've seen that people in this forum (including Chris) have been experimenting with Audiolense at least since 2007. And I can confirm evdplancke's statement, that achieving good results with RC is rather tricky. But I still think it's doable, although with a slow learning curve (at least in my case). My main mistake was the underestimation of the target curve. For my first measurements I always used the same target curve which I downloaded from a user at the Audiolense forum. I thought that later on I could fine tune my results by fiddling with the target curve. But the target curve actually seems to be the heart of RC and that particular curve is total crap. Once I have a reasonable target curve, the vertical position is no longer better than pointing between the speakers. Phase problems are gone in the horizontal position, regardless the rotation on its own axis and once I stopped manipulating delay times everything seems to be ok (see my first sentence). As a starting point I'm now using the target curve suggested at duffroomcorrection.com (see attachment). It sounds not that bad but treble resolution is unsatisfying, especially with classical music. My setup has to be in use unchanged for a couple of weeks before I will post further findings. Sorry. -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Phil Leigh;692437 Wrote: Wow - I'm really confused now. So you were using a target curve from someone else? - ouch. You SHOULD be using the target correction curve that AL generates for you, based on its desire to flatten your measurement curve. Sure you can tweak that curve a bit (for example, most people like to roll-off the top end a bit) and you need to adjust the overall gain (vertical scaling/position) of the curve to avoid any large corrective boosts - you may not have any of these. I've been using DRC since 2004 (TACT) and the measurement/curve side is essentially the same as AL. It DOES take time to do the measurements properly and then tweak the curve to YOUR liking... but NEVER use someone else's correction curve data! Emm... I didn't see an automatically created target curve within Audiolense. Where can I load this? This might be essential... ;-) -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
evdplancke;691915 Wrote: Do you mean you had a time misalignment of the same magnitude as 1.6 ms when the mic was not correctly oriented? No matter how hard I tried to put the microphone exactly between the speakers, Audiolense always calculated a delay for one or the other speaker and results where slightly out of balance and seemed out of phase. Delay was never as much as 1.6ms but it never completely disappeared. Once I do a 90 degrees rotation of the microphone, delays are gone. I've only seen this behavior in the vertical position. When I was measuring in a horizontal position, I intuitively made the logo look upwards and there where no delays (but it sounded bad anyway). -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
evdplancke;691915 Wrote: Do you mean you had a time misalignment of the same magnitude as 1.6 ms when the mic was not correctly oriented? No matter how hard I tried to put the microphone exactly between the speakers, Audiolense always calculated a delay for one or the other speaker and results where slightly out of balance and seemed out of phase. Delay was never as much as 1.6ms but it never completely disappeared. Once I do a 90 degrees rotation of the microphone, delays are gone. I've only seen this behavior in the vertical position. When I was measuring in a horizontal position, I intuitively made the logo look upwards and there where no delays (but it sounded bad anyway). -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
krzys;691982 Wrote: Quad are you using a mike correction ? different corrections for horizontal and vertical positions ? According to the previously referenced tread http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119164-ecm8000-orientation-speaker-measurements.html , the FR response varies a lot. In vertical position there is a very sharp drop above 10 kHz when in horizontal there is a bump! I just have one calibration file (see attachment of my previous post), according to that file my ECM8000 was calibrated in a horizontal position (0 degree incidence). It is pretty flat from 30Hz to 1kHz. From 1kHz to 10kHz there is a continuous increase up to +2db and from 10kHz to 20kHz there is a drop down to -4db. Compared to the chart in the thread my calibration file resembles the blue curve the most. That's funny because the blue curve is the vertical measurement and my microphone seems to have a similar behavior in the horizontal position... The differences between my ECM8000 and the one measured in the thread might be because of different microphone series (or due to a misunderstanding and my calibration file actually was created in a vertical position). Nevertheless, regarding the question of vertical vs horizontal position, I got constant results with or without calibration file: The horizontal position intensifies the mids while treble is attenuated, leading to a cavernish sound. The vertical position sounds correct. The calibration file is not the reason for the huge differences between different microphone positions. -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
It is quite interesting that we all make different experiences. But we do not all have the same measuring equipment and the same room. I think everything that Phil, Chris and me are saying is plausible. Just to make impressions complete, here are my latest and definitive conclusions with my Behringer ECM8000 (latest series, there are three of them): 1. Put something on your back wall where direct reflection are coming from (a cushion) 2. Put your ECM8000 in a vertical position, microphone head where your ears would be 3. Rotate your ECM8000 so that the Behringer logo points either to the left or to the right. Avoid the logo facing the wall or your speakers. What strikes me the most is the fact, that the omnidirectional ECM8000 is not omnidirectional in reality. If the Behringer logo faces the speakers, the left chanel is louder and phase is incorrect. If the logo faces the back wall, the right chanel is louder and phase is incorrect. The only situation with correct phase is a 90 degree rotation on its own axis. The second important insight is the vertical position. If you point the microphone to the speakers you could measure the speaker itself (under perfect room conditions). But you want to measure the room not the speaker. With this setup I'm having extremely pleasing results in conjunction with Audiolense in both rooms. No cavernish sound anymore and correct phase/stage. Treble still is reduced in my living room, but in a good manner. After listening to it for a couple of minutes, I realized that the result is much more realistic and less fatiguing than what I have listened to for the last two years. My audio room doesn't need that much correction. I hope that I'm more helping than confusing... -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
evdplancke;691794 Wrote: Another strange result is that I get a delay of 1.6 ms between channels. Given this corresponds to a distance of 0.5m at the speed of sound, I suspect difference in mic distance from each speaker is not the main cause of the delay. Can phase shift between channels due to wrong mic orientation be the cause? Again, if I have a good soundstage without RC, wouldn't it be better not to compensate for the delay? I will give it a try. That's exactly what I encountered when the orientation of the microphone is not correct. I always had delays between 0.02 and 0.06, regardless the distance to the speakers (measured with 'this' (http://www.google.ch/url?sa=trct=jq=bosch%20plr%2050source=webcd=4ved=0CGEQFjADurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bosch-do-it.ch%2Fboptocs2-ch%2FHeimwerker%2FWerkzeuge%2FCH%2Fde%2Fhw%2FEntfernungsmesser%2F95299%2FPLR%2B50%2F24116%2F3165140532518%2Findex.htmei=ecdDT8-sKcKwhAfq6NHDBQusg=AFQjCNEaoVrSeEf25GW_7PBb985hcVg42Qcad=rja)). With a correct rotation delay is quite stable at 0.00. So Phil might be right, when he says that 5-10cm deviation from the real center doesn't matter. -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Ok, I'm convinced now that I have to get a better microphone. Look at 'this thread' (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119164-ecm8000-orientation-speaker-measurements.html). Results are not at all the same for 0, 45 and 90 degrees. They depend very much on orientation. What I don't understand at the moment: According to the chart in the thread, in a vertical position treble is LOWER compared to the other orientations. Why do I get results with Audiolense that have LESS lowered treble, if measuring in a vertical position? Anyway, once concluded that orientation matters with ECM8000s, my results remain pleasing... -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
I have two rooms to measure. In one I'm pretty impressed in how it sounds with RC by Audiolense, in the other room not that much yet. I encounter similar problems as you, treble is gone. But stage and phase seem to be correct. Me for myself I had very different results if the microphone was not exactly centered between the speakers. Attached you will find the calibration file for my ECM8000. It looks quite different than Chris'. Mine has been calibrated in the 0 degree incidence, pointing to the speakers. That might not be ideal, because I have read that it should point to the ceiling for RC measurements. And indeed in the room where I'm pleased with RC I get better results when the microphone is pointing to the ceiling, even with a wrong calibration file. I really don't know if the direction for the calibration matters that much and I'm still unsure about the correct direction of the microphone for RC. I'm very unexperienced in microphones, measurements and RC. I will experiment further... Hopefully I will soon get a new Audiolense license for my new hardware. I had to by a notebook as it really is not practicable to move my server from room to room (surprise, surprise...) Good luck! +---+ |Filename: 230112-ECM8000.cal.txt | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13086| +---+ -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
I think I just figured out why it doesn't sound that good in my living room: My head is very close to the unprepared back wall (less than 10cm). The microphone in its vertical position gets a huge amount of treble reflection from that wall and Audiolense will correct that, as it is supposed to. When I'm listening to a corrected track, sitting on my sofa in a vice versa position (looking directly into the wall), treble is here again. That's quite flabbergasting. Human ears do have a focus unlike an omnidirectional microphone. And in this particular position this makes a huge difference. In my audio room the back wall with a light curtain is 1.5m away I can't wait to do more measurements with different degrees, please Bernt, hurry up with my new license ;-) -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Phil Leigh;691633 Wrote: the Behringer is not exactly the worlds best mic... Regardless, in my opinion you should not use an omni mic for room correction, you should use a cardioid or hypercardiod pointing at the mid point of the axis of the treble drivers. This is how your ears work more or less. Reflected sound is well down compared to direct sound. you really don't want any reflective surfaces within about 2m of your head and also the mic. Yes, I think I have to get a better microphone, optimized for RC according to humans ears. I thought that I could deal with a less than optimal listening position using RC. That's not the case (or it is more difficult than hoped). But in an already good setup you can further improve the listening experience without much effort. And improvements are not subtle. That's what I have learned in the last couple of days. -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
I successfully applied my first room correction file with Audiolense/Inguz. All the room modes are gone. Bass sounds tight as never before and strings sound silky. All this without changing the overall character of the soundstage. I bought a Behringer ECM8000 with a calibration file together with a microphone stand and XLR cable. A Tascam US-122MKII works as phantom pre amp. My target curve is the BK house curve. A very very big thank you to Phil Leigh! I wouldn't have had the nerve to try this out without your findings and postings. -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DAC Magic - Quad77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - Musical Fidelity X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Phil Leigh;690922 Wrote: Glad to have been of help. No idea what these folks messing with the TT mods are hearing in their systems but I hear similar stuff to you when using DRC. Would you agree that it is a serious - possibly game changing improvement? I realise this is a rather leading question :-) Mee too, I'm messing around with TT and PCM streaming. But I'm completely aware that those small changes I hear might very well be placebo and voodoo. If support for these kind of things would cease, I would not think over my Squeezebox solution. On the other hand - after my experiences of today - if Inguz would disappear, I would have to take into account direct PC audio with foobar or JRMC. They both support convolvers as well. So yes, this is certainly game changing. I already regret that I have not opted for the Earthworks microphone and the Tascam 144MKII with a digital out. Like this I could be sure to be on the high-end side. At the moment there is still room for improvment (at least in my head). The analogue outs of the 122MKII with ASIO don't sound that bad though... -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hey folks, please help me with getting Inguz/DRC/ setup on my SBT!!
Phil Leigh;690952 Wrote: I think the differences made by the mic and ADC are probably in the final 5-10% range so I wouldn't worry too much. Which version of AudioLense are you using? - I need to pony-up for the latest version of XO, but that's quite an investment. My friend Curt tells me it is worth it though... that will be my next upgrade, probably in the summer. regards Phil I'm on Audiolense 2.0. As usual, please go ahead and tell us how it sounds with XO ;-) -- Quad Audio Room: Touch - DacMagic - Quad 77/707 - Magneplanar 1.7 Living Room: Duet - X-DACv3 - Exposure 3010 S2 - Rowen Absolute MONO - Quad 21L Sleeping Room: Radio Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93393 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Classical Radio Uk
nice one. thx -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76536 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How can I stream this?
Arrgh Ignore my post #7. The only way to get it working is by following the steps in post #5. -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How can I stream this?
I have a solution for Windows which works fine for me. I don't really know how it works but it does. [1] Get executable mplayer.exe somewhere on the internet and put in in your bin folder (...\Squeezebox\server\Bin\MSWin32-x86-multi-thread) [2] Create a custom-convert.conf file with the following lines and put it in your server folder (...\Squeezebox\server) Code: #enables live FLAC streams coming in an OGG container flc flc * * # R [mplayer] -really-quiet -vc null -vo null -cache 512 -af volume=0,channels=2 -ao pcm:file=#PIPE# $FILE$ | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --ignore-chunk-sizes - ogg flc * * # R [mplayer] -really-quiet -vc null -vo null -cache 512 -af volume=0,channels=2 -ao pcm:file=#PIPE# $FILE$ | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --ignore-chunk-sizes - [3] Disable natvie OGG Vorbis support under Settings/Advanced/File Types [4] Restart Squeezebox Server and tune in url http://amp1.cesnet.cz:8000/cro-d-dur.flac -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] How can I stream this?
thestewman;490983 Wrote: Am I wrong ? Yes, you are. ;) I just found out that if you use the link with the extension .m3u instead of the one ending with .flac you just need to put the lines below into your custom-convert.conf and you can set OGG Vorbis support back to native again. Thanks for pointing this out! Like this it's much more elegant. Code: #enables live FLAC streams coming in an OGG container flc flc * * # R [mplayer] -really-quiet -vc null -vo null -cache 512 -af volume=0,channels=2 -ao pcm:file=#PIPE# $FILE$ | [flac] -cs --totally-silent --compression-level-0 --ignore-chunk-sizes - -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Questions re 24 bit audio
peber;460071 Wrote: Excuse the obvious question but...how? /Per Try www.castudio.org/dvdaudioextractor/. Sometimes there are audio tracks up to 24bit/96kHz on a DVD video. -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=68092 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter for Hi Bit Radio Streams
Here are a few other hi bit radio streams. Despite their high resolution they do not all sound equally good and some have too much talking. But maybe you will like the one or the other. ARS - RTV Slovenija (Ljubljana, Slovenia) http://www.rtvslo.si/media.php?id=ra.arsmt=wmmq=hiwm=truerm=true WMA at 192kbps RSI Rete Due (Lugano, Switzerland) http://stream.rsi.ch/retedue.m3u MP3 at 192kbps KUAT (Tucson, USA) http://streaming.azpm.org/kuat192.mp3 MP3 at 192kbps WFMT (Chicago, USA) http://wttw.ic.llnwd.net/stream/wttw_wfmt_livebroadcast AACplus at 128kbps WRTI Classical (Philadelphia, USA ) http://wrti-ice.streamguys.net/classical-247-aacp AACplus at 96kbps -- Quad CD = EAC = FLAC = SC 7.3.3 = SB Duet = DacMagic = Quad77 pre amp = Quad707 power amp = Quad 21L speakers Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63923 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter for Hi Bit Radio Streams
You're welcome. With SC 7.3.3 you no longer need a plugin for AACplus streams. It should be transcoded automatically by your computer. It will not work on SqueezeNetwork though. -- Quad CD = EAC = FLAC = SC 7.3.3 = SB Duet = DacMagic = Quad77 pre amp = Quad707 power amp = Quad 21L speakers Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=63923 ___ 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
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 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] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
One argument for the Transporter: It is able to play 96kHz files. As long as the most common way to get digital music is ripping standard CDs it's not a big advantage. But the more you can buy music online the more I would love being able to play the best quality offered. I'm extremely happy with my Duet/DacMagic but I just can't afford a Transporter. As you can see, I'm still convinced that a Transporter simply -has to- sound at least as good as a SB+DAC. And I experienced myself that a SB+DAC sounds better than a plain SB. No ABX-test, white noise or sound meter is needed. Would you really consider blind-testing scotch single malt vs. bourbon? ;-) -- 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] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
Phil Leigh;409699 Wrote: ...and a small counter-argument: 24/96 don't sound ANY different to 24/48... :-) Thats possible... never had the chance to try due to a lack of Transporter. ;-) Maybe there some serious testing would be appropriate. -- 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] A/B SB3 vs Transporter
I can hardly imagine that there will be no big difference between a Squeezebox and a Transporter. I do not own a Transporter but after having upgraded my Squeezebox with an external DAC, sound quality increased dramatically. I would expect the same from a Transporter. -- 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] Attention Audio Mythbusters!
Phil Leigh;396062 Wrote: Audiodiffmaker First off: streaming WAV vs. FLAC... guess what? - absolutely no difference on the analogue audio outs of an SB3. Don't believe me - try it for yourself. When I first came across lossless formats a couple of years ago, I made the following test (not my idea, seen this somewhere): - Ripping a CD track to WAV with EAC - Converting the track to APE - Invert the phases of the original WAV (using Samplitude) - Play both tracks at the same time (using Samplitude) Result: complete absolute silence even at maximum volume I've never done this test with FLAC. But since then I have no doubts that lossless actually is lossless... -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60041 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Attention Audio Mythbusters!
Oh, now I see. You were not talking about WAV vs. FLAC. It was _streaming_ WAV vs. FLAC. Everything after the magic, got it... -- Quad Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=60041 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
