Jitter vs no-Jitter

[sandyk]

I agree with Barrows, as I have quoted his summing up of Jitter characteristics several times previously, but I wonder if he actually tried this test, as I am normally well able to pick the tracks with most Jitter where I am familiar with the music, and in this case, I didn't really know what a real flute sounded like, and for the reasons bibo01 mentioned previously.

I didn't post a reply in the thread, but in a PM to Dennis I said that I thought with A1 that the flute was shrieking at me. Perhaps I just didn't like the lean sound of it , as I also remarked that I felt that it wasn't a great recording.

[Sal1950]

I disagree. You too are making the assumption that more accurate sound is 'naturally' going to be preferred. I think that assumption is an incorrect one. Or at a minimum one that is on very shaky ground.

 

Exactly, the fact that a less accurate sound can be preferred by some listeners is proven every day in the current fad for analog/vinyl sound over the much more accurate digital media all other factors being equal.

[Allan F]

Exactly, the fact that a less accurate sound can be preferred by some listeners is proven every day in the current fad for analog/vinyl sound over the much more accurate digital media all other factors being equal.

Digital media may provide greater accuracy, but it is not necessarily so because of digital artifacts. IMO, your generalization of digital media being "much more accurate" is an overstatement. Not to mention that all other factors are rarely equal.

[esldude]

A debatable opinion. Higher resolution does not necessarily equate to greater accuracy due to digital artifacts. Not to mention that all other factors are rarely equal.

 

Not much of a debate if it is an evidence based debate.

[Allan F]

Not much of a debate if it is an evidence based debate.

 

Only if the evidence is based on measurements as opposed to listening. The debate regarding how measurements translate to sound quality/accuracy is hardly resolved.

[esldude]

Only if the evidence is based on measurements as opposed to listening. The debate regarding how measurements translate to sound quality/accuracy is hardly resolved.

 

Evidence based is based upon evidence. Listening and all that is known about it is part of the evidence. Based upon the evidence the debate is pretty much no contest.

[bibo01]

Only if the evidence is based on measurements as opposed to listening. The debate regarding how measurements translate to sound quality/accuracy is hardly resolved.

 

We are going off topic here....

 

However, we have done some listening tests. The evidence is that, if you digitally record an analog source (SOTA turntable) and then play it back, you will not be able to tell the difference between the original source and the digital track.

[Allan F]

Evidence based is based upon evidence. Listening and all that is known about it is part of the evidence. Based upon the evidence the debate is pretty much no contest.

Thank you, but I hardly need your explanation of what evidence is, having dealt with it in a legal sense for over a quarter of a century. Your statement is your opinion. That's fine. However, the weight to be given to any piece or type of evidence is anything but absolute. Consequently, others may agree or disagree, depending on their experience and/or perspective.

[Jud]

We are going off topic here....

 

However, we have done some listening tests. The evidence is that, if you digitally record an analog source (SOTA turntable) and then play it back, you will not be able to tell the difference between the original source and the digital track.

 

You might be quite surprised what you cannot tell the difference between.

[Allan F]

You might be quite surprised what you cannot tell the difference between.

 

+ 1

 

And, in audio, the opposite is often true as well.

[bibo01]

You might be quite surprised what you cannot tell the difference between.

 

Allan F was talking about listening evidence. That is what I replied to.

[Allan F]

Allan F was talking about listening evidence. That is what I replied to.

Somehow, I highly doubt that Jud missed that.

[Jud]

Allan F was talking about listening evidence. That is what I replied to.

 

In any case I will try to listen to your samples and study the sound of jitter, to see if I can learn to tell a difference.

[bibo01]

Somehow, I highly doubt that Jud missed that.

I am sure he didn't

...just it seems that for some people evidence is never evidence enough

[bibo01]

In any case I will try to listen to your samples and study the sound of jitter, to see if I can learn to tell a difference.

 

Following Mitch' suggestion, we are preparing a further jitter test

[esldude]

I am sure he didn't

...just it seems that for some people evidence is never evidence enough

 

Now there is an idea we have some evidence about as well.

[esldude]

Thank you, but I hardly need your explanation of what evidence is, having dealt with it in a legal sense for over a quarter of a century. Your statement is your opinion. That's fine. However, the weight to be given to any piece or type of evidence is anything but absolute. Consequently, others may agree or disagree, depending on their experience and/or perspective.

 

Gives me an idea for a thread. We have a number of legal professionals here. Have one lawyer represent the subjective approach and one the objective approach. All we need is a judge with time to preside over the proceedings. I don't know anyone other than on here, but given the chance I would select Jud to represent my views.

[Jud]

Gives me an idea for a thread. We have a number of legal professionals here. Have one lawyer represent the subjective approach and one the objective approach. All we need is a judge with time to preside over the proceedings. I don't know anyone other than on here, but given the chance I would select Jud to represent my views.

 

As usual I've got to be different. Going to try to write that article and hope to point a "third way" with it.

 

But meanwhile, I've got to say I listen to music to get away from that legal stuff, and the idea of a "busman's holiday" does not appeal!

[esldude]

As usual I've got to be different. Going to try to write that article and hope to point a "third way" with it.

 

But meanwhile, I've got to say I listen to music to get away from that legal stuff, and the idea of a "busman's holiday" does not appeal!

 

Especially as it would be pro bono publico?

[Jud]

Especially as it would be pro bono publico?

 

That I've done. (In part responsible for writing the laws against domestic abuse in Oklahoma and getting them passed through the legislature.)

[bluesman]

I think over the long term eliminating distortion does the listener a service.

Where would that have left all those happy Bose 901 owners?

[Jud]

Where would that have left all those happy Bose 901 owners?

 

LOL - You don't know how many times I've turned away from the people I'm speaking with and hollered into the wall, "The sound of Bose!"

[Allan F]

Gives me an idea for a thread. We have a number of legal professionals here. Have one lawyer represent the subjective approach and one the objective approach. All we need is a judge with time to preside over the proceedings. I don't know anyone other than on here, but given the chance I would select Jud to represent my views.

Strikes me as an absolutely terrible idea. If people can't offer opinions or debate issues about audio without the assistance of lawyers, or draw their own conclusions without the aid of a judge, then it's time to shut down the Forum. Hopefully, the vast majority of us view this as a hobby to be enjoyed, not litigated.

[bluesman]

Strikes me as an absolutely terrible idea. If people can't offer opinions or debate issues about audio without the assistance of lawyers, or draw their own conclusions without the aid of a judge, then it's time to shut down the Forum. Hopefully, the vast majority of us view this as a hobby to be enjoyed, not litigated.

C'mon, Allan - it's an ideal CA thread! For every 2 lawyers, there are at least 3 opinions......

[RedFuneral]

So I did guess right after all. To save people the trip back in the thread, I tested using onboard audio & a pair of AKG K81 DJ headphones. Hardly audiophile but my DAC was incompatible with the sample rate so I made do. For the sake of analysis I'm 22yrs old and have been in this hobby since 16. I didn't attempt to analyze the files using established terminology as I quickly found my attention drifting elsewhere with one file(simply put it was a fatiguing listen) and the other holding my attention. In place of overanaylsis I went with my first impressions.

 

I felt A2 was channeling the characteristics of my main system which have led me to seek out a new DAC(I am currently using an Ultra-Fi DAC41, no filtering/oversampling/anything extra.) In fact this fatiguing element is usually what causes me to seek out new hardware; I generally find after I adapt to the sound of a new system I listen to it less and less as time goes on. It's so far proven universal regardless of sound signature. Given the preference for the track with jitter I wonder if there are established preferences at work(I grew up with Windows 95 and video game soundtracks so I'm skeptical) or if the irritation is most evident in higher frequencies. I don't have the answers and am mostly just left realizing that jitter/distortion is a cumulative effect rather than a strict bottleneck. I still tweak when I'm between DACs and numerous well received tweaks bring audible improvements to the most lowly of computer audio.

 

Either way I thank you for the thread, it gives me some direction as per my search for a new DAC. Previously I was in the minimalist camp wanting as least interference as possible(due mostly to mushy over-filtered transients) and now I'll be paying more attention to jitter & clocking.