Jump to content
IGNORED

*This* Should Set the Cat Amongst the Pigeons


Jud

Recommended Posts

Dennis (esldude) sent me some test files with very slight loudness variations in a couple, but not others. I felt very little confidence in the results, which I let him know when I sent my guesses back. But I actually got a perfect score, 4 out of 4. (2 were constant loudness, 1 had variations of .4db in both channels, and 1 had variations of .4db in one channel.) I did have the advantage of a hint, in that Dennis had let me know about the 2-1-1 split in advance.

 

I felt that I had heard greater differences between Audirvana Plus versions 1.5.10 and 1.5.12. So I asked Dennis to send me "de-identified" (renamed) versions - 5 files with generic names like A through E or 1 through 5, in any combination of Audirvana 1.5.10 and 1.5.12 versions totaling 5 (0 and 5, 1 and 4, etc.). Dennis sent me the files, but Dropbox mangled them. So I enlisted Bill Scott, who kindly assisted me even though he is extremely busy (grant renewal time for the lab!). Today I listened for quite a while to 1.5.10. 1.5.12, and the 5 de-identified versions with several pieces of music, then sent Bill my guesses. I then realized I could simply look at "About Audirvana Plus" in the Audirvana Plus menu to see how I'd done.

 

To put it simply, I suck. 1 right, 4 wrong.

 

Let the games begin!

 

P.S. I would be happy to send renamed versions to folks who'd like to repeat the experiment and see if they can better my sorry showing. It takes some repair of the files if sent through Dropbox; perhaps Google Drive would work better.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

There's nothing on the A+ UI to say what version it is. So if you rename "Audirvana Plus.app" to, e.g., "AplusA.app," "AplusB.app," etc., there's no way to tell whether A is version 1.5.10 and B is 1.5.12 unless you look in the menu under "About Audirvana Plus." So the idea is to have known versions .10 and .12, then listen to the renamed apps and see if you can tell what version(s) they are.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Ah, now I get it. Clear as blue sky once you explain it me. :)

-Paul

 

 

There's nothing on the A+ UI to say what version it is. So if you rename "Audirvana Plus.app" to, e.g., "AplusA.app," "AplusB.app," etc., there's no way to tell whether A is version 1.5.10 and B is 1.5.12 unless you look in the menu under "About Audirvana Plus." So the idea is to have known versions .10 and .12, then listen to the renamed apps and see if you can tell what version(s) they are.

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
P.S. I would be happy to send renamed versions to folks who'd like to repeat the experiment and see if they can better my sorry showing. It takes some repair of the files if sent through Dropbox; perhaps Google Drive would work better.

 

Jud

It has been my experience, that I have stated many times previously, and has been verified by many others, that Internet transmission, even copying of files to other locations and computers causes quite a bit of degradation. What makes you so sure that this hasn't happened here ? I have steadfastly refused to do any tests of comparison files involving copying/moving of the files using Internet transmission. That's exactly why I keep suggesting that if I do so it will need to be using a USB memory stick sent to a neutral participant, where the files are renamed MANUALLY, with any previous properties information removed without disturbing or copying the contents of the files, then sent back to me.

Dennis simply refuses to accept that such degradation is possible, just as he refuses to accept that 16/44.1 is all that is needed for the highest quality reproduction of digital audio is utter BS.

Why is he ignoring the example .wav files of 16/44.1, 24/44.1, and 24/48 that JonP provided for comparison purposes in another recent thread , just like the rest of the highly vocal sceptics?

Do your previous comparisons again under non sighted listening conditions as you did originally, and I would be willing to bet that your conclusions would be the same as those originally. I would also suggest that Alex C does the same again, and you both compare notes again as previously. Even if your own confidence has been shattered, I doubt very much that Alex C. will be fazed in the slightest, and is still well able to demonstrate under non sighted conditions to others that he IS correct.

Note also that Cookie Marenco provides her files as UNCOMPRESSED Zips in an attempt to reduce this degradation that the resident sceptics insist isn't possible.

 

Regards

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

Just to clarify Jud: you got 5 out of 5 right where there was a very small volume difference; but only 1 out of 5 right when assessing which version of Audirvana you were using for playback?

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
It has been my experience, that I have stated many times previously, and has been verified by many others, that Internet transmission, even copying of files to other locations and computers causes quite a bit of degradation. What makes you so sure that this hasn't happened here ?
I wonder if similar sort of degradation presents itself in statements downloaded from online banking?

We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.

-- Jo Cox

Link to comment
Jud It has been my experience, that I have stated many times previously, and has been verified by many others, that Internet transmission, even copying of files to other locations and computers causes quite a bit of degradation. What makes you so sure that this hasn't happened here ? I have steadfastly refused to do any tests of comparison files involving copying/moving of the files using Internet transmission. That's exactly why I keep suggesting that if I do so it will need to be using a USB memory stick sent to a neutral participant, where the files are renamed MANUALLY, with any previous properties information removed without disturbing or copying the contents of the files, then sent back to me. Dennis simply refuses to accept that such degradation is possible, just as he refuses to accept that 16/44.1 is all that is needed for the highest quality reproduction of digital audio is utter BS. Why is he ignoring the example .wav files of 16/44.1, 24/44.1, and 24/48 that JonP provided for comparison purposes in another recent thread , just like the rest of the highly vocal sceptics? Do your previous comparisons again under non sighted listening conditions as you did originally, and I would be willing to bet that your conclusions would be the same as those originally. I would also suggest that Alex C does the same again, and you both compare notes again as previously. Even if your own confidence has been shattered, I doubt very much that Alex C. will be fazed in the slightest, and is still well able to demonstrate under non sighted conditions to others that he IS correct. Note also that Cookie Marenco provides her files as UNCOMPRESSED Zips in an attempt to reduce this degradation that the resident sceptics insist isn't possible. Regards Alex
You seem to be equating data transmission with radioactive half life... there is no decay factor in data transmission, only the question of did you use a lossy or lossless data transfer protocol. Lossless data transfer protocols for server-client have been standard since the late 90's for non real time applications. Real time applications do lose data based on buffer capability, transmission speed and media error rate. Sounds like the finger you are pointing is at low grade file transfer capability in the receiving device... probably a flow control weakness.

Regards,

Dave

 

Audio system

Link to comment

Note also that Cookie Marenco provides her files as UNCOMPRESSED Zips in an attempt to reduce this degradation that the resident sceptics insist isn't possible.

 

Can you provide a reference from Cookie to confirm that she believes this?

 

Her website says that she thinks that WAV files sound better than FLAC but nothing about zipping them to prevent degradation. I am pretty sure the WAV files are simply zipped to make them smaller for download.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment

KK

I only started using Uncompressed Zips after Roch kept insisting that I should try this method. It took me quite a while to get around to trying it, as I found it a little hard to believe at the time.

I did indeed hear the improvement that Roch said that I would. Roch has I understand, been in contact with Cookie on quite a few occasions. If they are provided as Uncompressed Zips then the files will not be smaller.

Perhaps somebody else can confirm whether or not the Zipped files that Cookie Marenco provides are of similar size to the unzipped result ?

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

KK - She does indeed believe this, and that is the way she provides purchased files for download.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Just to clarify Jud: you got 5 out of 5 right where there was a very small volume difference; but only 1 out of 5 right when assessing which version of Audirvana you were using for playback?

 

Hi Eloise - 4 for 4 on Dennis's test files, otherwise correct.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
KK - She does indeed believe this, and that is the way she provides purchased files for download.

 

Do you have a reference for this?

 

I can understand using zip to compress a file to make downloads smaller but I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around zipping a file to prevent file degradation while it travels over the Internet.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
KK - She does indeed believe this, and that is the way she provides purchased files for download.

 

It's also interesting that neither Cookie or Barry wish to supply .flac files to download..

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
It's also interesting that neither Cookie or Barry wish to supply .flac files to download..

 

Interesting but completely unrelated to what we are discussing.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
KK

I only started using Uncompressed Zips after Roch kept insisting that I should try this method. It took me quite a while to get around to trying it, as I found it a little hard to believe at the time.

I did indeed hear the improvement that Roch said that I would. Roch has I understand, been in contact with Cookie on quite a few occasions. If they are provided as Uncompressed Zips then the files will not be smaller.

Perhaps somebody else can confirm whether or not the Zipped files that Cookie Marenco provides are of similar size to the unzipped result ?

Alex

 

Hi Alex,

 

This is true from Cookie (Downloads Now). She told me, that after a lot of test with customers and his staff, she arrived to this conclusion.

 

There is another hi res download place (I don't remember the name right now) that uses the same method, but all the music tracks are in one only uncompressed zip file, where Cookie uses one for each music track.

 

The uncompressed zip utility is free for Windows & Mac users. But any zip utility will unzip this files.

 

I never got errors when downloading from Downloads Now, but yes from other download places and got corrupted files, even if they look OK, after my browser and the downloader utility shows correct checksums.

 

BTW, a credit card statement is about 300 KB and a regular DSD album is > 2GB, and a "little" more complicated. But bits are bits, isn't it?

 

I don't like to discuss this anymore, had being before.

 

Kind regards,

 

Roch

Link to comment
Hi Alex,

 

This is true from Cookie (Downloads Now). She told me, that after a lot of test with customers and his staff, she arrived to this conclusion.

 

There is another hi res download place (I don't remember the name right now) that uses the same method, but all the music tracks are in one only uncompressed zip file, where Cookie uses one for each music track.

 

The uncompressed zip utility is free for Windows & Mac users. But any zip utility will unzip this files.

 

I never got errors when downloading from Downloads Now, but yes from other download places and got corrupted files, even if they look OK, after my browser and the downloader utility shows correct checksums.

 

BTW, a credit card statement is about 300 KB and a regular DSD album is > 2GB, and a "little" more complicated. But bits are bits, isn't it?

 

I don't like to discuss this anymore, had being before.

 

Kind regards,

 

Roch

 

Hi Roch,

 

Thanks for sharing this.

 

KK

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment

Hi kumakuma,

 

Do you have a reference for this?

 

I can understand using zip to compress a file to make downloads smaller but I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around zipping a file to prevent file degradation while it travels over the Internet.

 

In my experience, even standard zipping of a .wav (or .aif) file does not result in very much of a change in the ultimate file size--certainly not anything like the file size reduction one gets with say, a word processing file.

 

As an example, I just took one of the 24/192 song files from one of the Soundkeeper albums and zipped it. The original is ~450 MB in size. The zipped file is ~421 MB. Less than 7% file size reduction. Not exactly much of a difference in download time.

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

Link to comment

In my experience, even standard zipping of a .wav (or .aif) file does not result in very much of a change in the ultimate file size--certainly not anything like the file size reduction one gets with say, a word processing file.

 

Thanks, Barry. I found the same thing when I zipped a couple of wav files myself.

 

BTW, any thoughts on the more controversial topic of file quality degrading when files are copied or sent over the Internet?

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment

HI kumakuma,

 

Thanks, Barry. I found the same thing when I zipped a couple of wav files myself.

 

BTW, any thoughts on the more controversial topic of file quality degrading when files are copied or sent over the Internet?

 

I haven't yet experimented with regard to Internet file transmission. At this point I don't feel the speed is where it needs to be for a whole album at say, 24/192 to be downloaded in what I deem a reasonable amount of time. (Apparently it might be for *some* folks but the speeds are not widespread enough -- i.e., they're not common enough among most users.) Since I don't want to reduce the raw PCM files in any way just for the sake of faster transmission, I have put downloads on hold indefinitely.

 

So while I can't say anything about the integrity (or lack therein) of Internet file transmission, I can confidently say that transmission via a DVD-R results in files I have not been able to discern from the source files. ;-}

 

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

The Soundkeeper | Audio, Music, Recording, Playback

Barry Diament Audio

Link to comment

By the way, just to stave off any confusion - the music tracks I used came from my SD cards. The player app (only a single app, as Bill sent 5 renamed copies of version 1.5.10), with its associated files, is what was sent via download (zipped, as that was the only way to transmit them so they would arrive undamaged).

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I then realized I could simply look at "About Audirvana Plus" in the Audirvana Plus menu to see how I'd done.

 

Hey everyone, I can fix that problem in a heartbeat: It is easy to get rid of the About A+ box revealing the version! Highlight the App, right-click and select Show Package Contents. Then open Contents>Resources>English.lproj and delete the file named "About.nib."

 

So who wants to send around another set of versions? Or someone can do it to me. The only thing I ask is that I know which 4 (5 is a little much) versions you are sending. That way, if I get a little stuck I can compare the sound of my archived versions to confirm an match up. But I doubt it will be that hard. I know I'll be able to identify the wonderful 1.5.10 out of any crowd of A+ versions.

Link to comment
The uncompressed zip utility is free for Windows & Mac users. But any zip utility will unzip this files.

What, there's no audiophile zip utility? Now there's an opportunity for some enterprising programmer.

Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.

- Einstein

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...