Jump to content
IGNORED

Music for testing Audio Equipment


Recommended Posts

Speaking of ABBA, I have the original album, as shown at the start here, and this song should be able to blow your roof off, with complete fidelity - a powerful drug, :),

 

 

A slower paced number which tells a lot,

 

 

Both tracks should be intensely satisying listening experiences ...

Link to comment

I’m an ABBA fan too but somehow don’t have those high quality tracks.  Can you give pointers where and how to get them please?  I’d love to hear the band at its best.

WS2019 Core Datacenter, dualPC, JPLAY Femto, AO3, Fidelizer Pro 8.8, MC2XY, IOS app.

 

Link to comment

I created the equivalent selections for So Long from the best of several CDs in my posession.  The biggest difference other than the DHNRDS having much cleaner percussion high end, is that the DHNRDS is louder.  I did a quick analysis, and it appears that there is an errant peak in the CD version, which makes normalization less effective.  Additionally, it creates a fake peak-rms ratio.  The CD version is also only 44.1k, but the quality difference cannot be created by a 44.1k sample rate at all.

 

Even though it might seem that the DHNRDS version is more compressed, it SEEMS like it is caused by the excessively high peaks on the DolbyA HW version, then the normalization takes those peaks into account, turning down the gain.  There STILL might be a difference in compression, but all of the loudness difference seems to be taken into account by the bigger peaks on the normal CD/DolbyA HW version.  Those peaks do NOT reflect accuracy,, rather poor management of phase.  The DHNRDS is very very careful about phase -- actually implementing ALL audio filtering linear phase.

EDIT:  Actually not ALL filters are normal filters -- approx 64 Hilbert transformers are used also.

 

Best CD version that I have -- with the peaks (and associated lower level):

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b0aag2s3449aga1/SoLong-CD-0to45.flac?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h46cx78l470rljz/SoLong-CD-70to115.flac?dl=0

John

 

Link to comment

In the spirit of Big Music, this soundtrack album, that I've mentioned many times, is a system buster if ever there was one - superbly recorded, this delivers a massive subjective  hit if the rig can keep it together at good volumes ...

 

 

Link to comment
On 3/31/2019 at 7:33 AM, John Dyson said:

I know that this will sound odd -- and I am speaking of SIGNAL PROCESSING and not really 'listening equipment' per se.  ABBA is a terror to process (wall of sound, mixed female vocals, plethora/all kinds of processing/etc.)  If done correctly, many of their recordings are of moderately high quality -- sometimes very pretty  -- but as soon as that DolbyA hardware decode hit it -- splat city/lack of distinct sound/etc.   Karen Carpenters vocals are also tricky to process -- they used an ill fitting enhancement scheme and chorus effect that makes following her vocals -- 'interesting.'   I am SO VERY TIRED of listening to those groups, but because of the folly from the 1970's signal processing, these recordings might as well be for testing as much as listening.  The 'Masquerade' from Benson is h*ll wrt dynamics -- good to listen, very hard to process and maintain quality.

 

When it comes to super-high-quality listening -- I was just waken up to the Dire Straits album (the original, pristine digital form) with 'money for nothing.'   Pretty intense if one has a proper copy of it.  (Such copies are probably few and far between.)   I tend to make my own listening copies :-).

 

I really like McCartney's _Tug of War_ album. Recorded very basically for the time, strange mix on some tracks. Drum smacks that are just strange. Everything you could imagine. 

When you listen to it, it is less advanced than the other albums of its time, which is why it still sounds pretty good. 

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

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Paul R said:

 

I really like McCartney's _Tug of War_ album. Recorded very basically for the time, strange mix on some tracks. Drum smacks that are just strange. Everything you could imagine. 

When you listen to it, it is less advanced than the other albums of its time, which is why it still sounds pretty good. 

AFAIR, it was the first or one of the first digital albums by EMI pop. It's ADD, so it's analog tape that was mixed and then converted to digital or converted to digital and mixed, and then mastered digitally. I don't think there were actually digital mixers then, so I think it was probably mixed before conversion,  I could be wrong. The middle "D" can mean either.  That probably accounts for some the sound. 
 

At the time there was publicity that EMI hadn't gone over to digital (much as with 8 track and 16 track, they lagged technologically behind other lables) until McCartney (their biggest selling artist at the time) went into the office  of the Chairman  and said, essentially, "hey get with the program  -everyone is going digital, so install digital equipment"....

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
6 hours ago, firedog said:

AFAIR, it was the first or one of the first digital albums by EMI pop. It's ADD, so it's analog tape that was mixed and then converted to digital or converted to digital and mixed, and then mastered digitally. I don't think there were actually digital mixers then, so I think it was probably mixed before conversion,  I could be wrong. The middle "D" can mean either.  That probably accounts for some the sound. 
 

At the time there was publicity that EMI hadn't gone over to digital (much as with 8 track and 16 track, they lagged technologically behind other lables) until McCartney (their biggest selling artist at the time) went into the office  of the Chairman  and said, essentially, "hey get with the program  -everyone is going digital, so install digital equipment"....

Cool! I know the original recording was analog, but I did not know it was a digital mix (or mastering?) Gee, in 1981, that would have been a 16/44.1 digital master, I think. of course we did not really have CDs yet when this was made. Everything was still vinyl. 

 

Amazing... Maybe the “CD is perfect sound forever” guys do have some evidence on their side. :) 

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

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
On 2/27/2019 at 8:29 PM, oso said:

I just commented on another thread about how good the bass and drum sound is on this recording.

Unbelievable that you can achieve that with only one microphone. I wonder why that kind of recordings are so rare.

 

 

 

On 3/24/2019 at 10:56 AM, PAP said:

They released it this weekend.

It's a fantastic live recording. I'll go as far after the first listen to say that audiophile live recordings does not get better than this.

This could be an instant classic. 

Blows away "Jazz at the Pawn Shop".

spacer.png https://www.soundliaison.com/

 

These completely phase coherent one microphone recordings does it for me, they are so much better than anything else I have.

It sounds very real but also very very good. Only problem is that all my old reference material some how falls short now....

 

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/5/2019 at 10:04 PM, Milan said:

 

 

These completely phase coherent one microphone recordings does it for me, they are so much better than anything else I have.

It sounds very real but also very very good. Only problem is that all my old reference material some how falls short now....

 

 

I understand your point, but I still value my multi mic recordings. The thing with the one mic recordings must be that complete phase coherent sound stage, it is so pleasing to the ear. But I wonder if it wound have been possible for Me'Shell Ndegéocello to make ''Peace beyond Passion'' in this manner (see first post) and also, so far they have only released 2 downloads recorded this way, and although I must admit that I keep playing those albums, they are kind of addictive, I do need more than 2 albums to satisfy my hungry music soul.😀

Link to comment
On 3/24/2019 at 10:56 AM, PAP said:

They released it this weekend.

It's a fantastic live recording. I'll go as far after the first listen to say that audiophile live recordings does not get better than this.

This could be an instant classic. 

Blows away "Jazz at the Pawn Shop".

spacer.png https://www.soundliaison.com/

The album is on special offer at Native DSD during Easter, same price as by Sound Liaison but DSD only.

Link to comment
On 4/5/2019 at 7:14 AM, Paul R said:

...

Amazing... Maybe the “CD is perfect sound forever” guys do have some evidence on their side. :) 

 

Though I'm not exactly a "CD is PSF" kind of guy (I do appreciate at least the theoretical value of 24/96). The truth is that those guys have always had plenty of evidence on their side...

 

 

Archimago's Musings: A "more objective" take for the Rational Audiophile.

Beyond mere fidelity, into immersion and realism.

:nomqa: R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Though I'm not exactly a "CD is PSF" kind of guy (I do appreciate at least the theoretical value of 24/96). The truth is that those guys have always had plenty of evidence on their side...

 

Discussed this before elsewhere -- at the 44.1k-48k/16 bits level, other factors than just the sample rate/bit depth tend to be the problem. 

Even in the most extreme cases, assuming perfection in the recording itself, then 48k/20bits is all that could possibly be needed.  At the very high SNR/low distortion/flat response/perfect transient response in the hearing range (Gibbs has been discussed elsewhere), things other than the media data rates tend to be the limitation.

(I know that most of the pure techies might agree with the general statement -- maybe not the details.)

 

IMO -- the biggest defect that the CD rate is good enough -- I do believe that 48k is really better.  Also an extra bit of bit depth might help a little for those who have very very good hearing.  No matter what, CD is darned good -- especially for REAL recordings.  I am sure that there are a few specialty recordings that might approach the CD limits of actual quality -- VERY FEW recordings.

I also believe (know) that 96k/24bits is extreme overkill for listening purposes -- creating more burden on a system/memory-disk space/etc than necessary.

 

Admittedly 96k/24bits feels good.  44.1k/16bits is good enough and for all practical purposes perfect for listening.  (Again, I still claim that 48k is marginally better than 44.1k, but cannot prove it.)

 

John

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Though I'm not exactly a "CD is PSF" kind of guy (I do appreciate at least the theoretical value of 24/96). The truth is that those guys have always had plenty of evidence on their side...

 

 

LOL! Well said. 

 

I believe (but cannot reasonably prove) that 16/44.1 should sound better than it does on a lot of CD's, and that the reason it does not is poor mastering, poor mixing, poor playback equipment, poor performances, or some combination of all those factors. to an inherent problem with the format. On the CD's that do sound extraordinarily good, I attribute the reverse of the same factors. Playback chain perhaps having the east effect, since a good CD sounds good almost anywhere. 

 

But, unreasonably, my ears insist that recording at 24/192k sounds "more like the microphone" than at any lower rate, including 24/96. Though, 24/96 sounds more like the mic feed than does 24/48 to 24/44.1. I am unable to convince myself that is just bias. Just as I can clearly hear differences between a CD quality file and a MP3 version made from that same file.  (Never mind which one I sometimes prefer in blind tests, I can't always explain that either!)

 

Now I may have "learned" that from people whose opinions I respect, but if so, it was a hard lesson learned because I sure didn't *want* to hear differences. Indeed, I would be very happy if a vinyl rip at 16/44.1 sounded as good to me as one at 24/192k. Or if the RIAA filters in most phono preamps were as good as the RIAA software filters. 

 

It's a fun place to be though. :)

 

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

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

  At the very high SNR/low distortion/flat response/perfect transient response in the hearing range (Gibbs has been discussed elsewhere)

 

I hear ringing!  😁

 

Seriously, I have a MS "Surface Go" tablet with a headphone out.  MS does not list the hardware of the DAC/amp - I assume a low cost Cirrus Logic or similar.  Anyways, when I send 16/44.1 through this hardware (no matter the OS setting:  through the OS sound drivers, WASAPI, etc.) with strong LF content (e.g. electronica) that is not masked, I can hear ringing timed with the LF.  If I send 88.2/96 or higher (the DAC accepts up to 192) the ringing disappears.  If I upsample 16/44.1 (through Roon, or some other app) to 88.2 or higher the ringing disappears.

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...

Only 2 days left of the special offer for this superb recording;

On 3/24/2019 at 10:56 AM, PAP said:

They released it this weekend.

It's a fantastic live recording. I'll go as far after the first listen to say that audiophile live recordings does not get better than this.

This could be an instant classic. 

Blows away "Jazz at the Pawn Shop".

spacer.png https://www.soundliaison.com/

 

 

On 3/31/2019 at 2:21 PM, PAP said:

And that very much live feel has to do with the audience being so close they say on the S.L. site;  https://www.soundliaison.com/

 

 

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
On 3/19/2019 at 9:22 PM, oso said:

 

strange this is on you tube but it is not on the S.L. site...

 

 

On 3/24/2019 at 10:56 AM, PAP said:

They released it this weekend.

It's a fantastic live recording. I'll go as far after the first listen to say that audiophile live recordings does not get better than this.

This could be an instant classic. 

Blows away "Jazz at the Pawn Shop".

spacer.png https://www.soundliaison.com/

Comparing it to Jazz at the Pawn Shop now....technology sure has improved;

 

 

On 3/20/2019 at 8:55 PM, oso said:

 

 

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/31/2019 at 11:02 PM, stuck limo said:

"Miracles" by Jefferson Starship is a great test track. It will allow you to test your depth and instrument/vocals separation very well since there's a LOT going on in the song throughout the runtime. A buddy and I used it to test a generic cable vs an AQ Carbon and the difference was astounding.

Excellent!

 

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...