Jump to content
IGNORED

Jitter vs no-Jitter Part II


bibo01

Which is the track with LESS jitter?  

8 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Dear Friends,

 

After our first test "Jitter vs. no-Jitter" here it is another test, actually two, on our ability to recognize jitter.

 

Following the advice of the user "mitchco" We have prepared a file containing two songs by Marilyn Mazur & Jan Garbarek from the album "Elixir" - "Bell-Painting" and "Elixir" - for high and low range respectively, with high DR.

 

At the moment I do not want to give too much technical information, which will be given at the end of the survey. The two tests seem the same, but obviously they are not.

Both songs were recorded with two equal converters, but one was defective and produced much jitter.

 

In both tests we have to try to recognize the song with LESS jitter.

 

The poll will last one week only and it is published on three forums: NextHardware, ComputerAudiophile, WhatsBest.

 

For "Jitter vs. no-jitter Part II" the tracks can be downloaded from:

dropcanvas - instant drag and drop sharing - canvas view

or

https://www.dropbox.com/s/agbq0wizwa301au/Test%201.zip?dl=0

 

For "Jitter vs. no-jitter Part III" the tracks can be downloaded from:

dropcanvas - instant drag and drop sharing - canvas view

or

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pis3kp818onp168/Test%202.zip?dl=0

 

Good listening!

Link to comment

Well I voted over at WBF. So not voting again. So far I appear to be your only poll taker.

 

Some people just don't trust their ears.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
Well I voted over at WBF. So not voting again. So far I appear to be your only poll taker.

 

Some people just don't trust their ears.

 

I would very much distrust my ears to reliably hear jitter until/unless I can train myself to recognize it.

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
Well I voted over at WBF. So not voting again. So far I appear to be your only poll taker.

 

Some people just don't trust their ears.

 

Perhaps most members simply couldn't be bothered ?

There wasn't exactly an avalanche of participants the first time around either.

It would be interesting to see stats on C.A. member log ins recently compared with several months ago, as there appears to be greatly reduced member participation rates in quite a few other forums as well at present .

The Farcebook influence ?

 

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

I mostly find listening tests such as these annoying. So unless it is a topic/type of test I'm particularly interested in, I don't do them.

 

There was another online test a few years ago of jitter; I took it and could reliably differentiate 30ns from 100ns. The second jitter test is online. / Reference / AVI Forum

 

Jud - if you listen to these files repeatedly (sighted), I think you can start to get an idea of what jitter sounds like. IMO strings and percussion bring it out best.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Listening: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Matrix Element i Streamer/DAC (XLR)+Schiit Freya>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
I mostly find listening tests such as these annoying. So unless it is a topic/type of test I'm particularly interested in, I don't do them.

 

There was another online test a few years ago of jitter; I took it and could reliably differentiate 30ns from 100ns. The second jitter test is online. / Reference / AVI Forum

 

Jud - if you listen to these files repeatedly (sighted), I think you can start to get an idea of what jitter sounds like. IMO strings and percussion bring it out best.

...then you can easily differentiate the tracks here :)

Link to comment
...then you can easily differentiate the tracks here :)

 

But I don't care to....:) I'm just enjoying listening to my music. That free Ibeniz from playclassics.com and Shostakovich Chamber Symphonies I got on a discount from eClassical this week. A lot more fun than listening to jitter.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +_iFi  AC iPurifiers >Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Conditioning+Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Listening: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Matrix Element i Streamer/DAC (XLR)+Schiit Freya>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
I hear differences in both, I voted for the tracks that don't "hurt my ears".

 

So tracks that sound smoothed over a bit are better and lower jitter to you because they don't stress your ears. Some assumptions behind that idea (a common idea it is). That the best music is smooth and easier to listen. Yet jitter would disperse peak sound levels over a wider than real frequency. Would tend to smooth a good recordings details by spreading those details around and obscure through raised noise levels. Some real music is stressful to the ear.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
So tracks that sound smoothed over a bit are better and lower jitter to you because they don't stress your ears. Some assumptions behind that idea (a common idea it is). That the best music is smooth and easier to listen. Yet jitter would disperse peak sound levels over a wider than real frequency. Would tend to smooth a good recordings details by spreading those details around and obscure through raised noise levels. Some real music is stressful to the ear.

 

It depends what hurts his ears. :)

 

One interesting thing at an RMAF seminar on measurement that I attended this year was the last of a series of demonstrations of audibility of various types of distortion. Slew rate limiting was supposed to be quite innocuous, but it really got to me. While others sat placidly, I called out, "Sounds like an ultrasonic cleaner!" It really bothered me. So I think it's possible jitter might "hurt the ears" of some people (irritating "tizz" or lack of clarity, perhaps) while sounding OK or even better to others (due to the types of characteristics you mentioned, a more rounded or "warm" sound).

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 wasn't sure I could hear a difference in sound quality however I thought that the instrument placement sounded different between A and B. Not certain what that means if anything. With track A the instruments seemed more centrally located than with B.

Link to comment
So tracks that sound smoothed over a bit are better and lower jitter to you because they don't stress your ears. Some assumptions behind that idea (a common idea it is). That the best music is smooth and easier to listen. Yet jitter would disperse peak sound levels over a wider than real frequency. Would tend to smooth a good recordings details by spreading those details around and obscure through raised noise levels. Some real music is stressful to the ear.

 

I've simply reported by observation and why I voted the way I did. This is what I heard last time as well and voted on the same basis even though I knew I was in the minority. In any case I detected a difference and have reported it. At some point if we keep doing this my observations might become statistically significant.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
It depends what hurts his ears. :)

 

One interesting thing at an RMAF seminar on measurement that I attended this year was the last of a series of demonstrations of audibility of various types of distortion. Slew rate limiting was supposed to be quite innocuous, but it really got to me. While others sat placidly, I called out, "Sounds like an ultrasonic cleaner!" It really bothered me. So I think it's possible jitter might "hurt the ears" of some people (irritating "tizz" or lack of clarity, perhaps) while sounding OK or even better to others (due to the types of characteristics you mentioned, a more rounded or "warm" sound).

 

I'd say that the tracks I prefer have what I describe as very clean high notes more akin to what I hear from actual instruments (properly tuned and played :), whereas the ones that "hurt my ears" sound like as if the high note were attached to a very small vibrating drill.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
It depends what hurts his ears. :)

 

One interesting thing at an RMAF seminar on measurement that I attended this year was the last of a series of demonstrations of audibility of various types of distortion. Slew rate limiting was supposed to be quite innocuous, but it really got to me. While others sat placidly, I called out, "Sounds like an ultrasonic cleaner!" It really bothered me. So I think it's possible jitter might "hurt the ears" of some people (irritating "tizz" or lack of clarity, perhaps) while sounding OK or even better to others (due to the types of characteristics you mentioned, a more rounded or "warm" sound).

 

That is only because your Spectrals prevent you developing immunity to slew rate limiting. :)

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
That is only because your Spectrals prevent you developing immunity to slew rate limiting. :)

 

The thought had occurred. ;)

 

Of course that probably means I can't hear some form of distortion evident to 99% of the population - maybe jitter?!

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

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...