Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
beerandmusic

IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 I have better things to do than get into another useless discussion with a yet another hard line Objectivist.

 I have been doing that for > 9 years already in this forum , and no longer give a rat's rear end whether some of your crowd believe me or not.  

 

Hey, Alex, don't get too fussed about Richard's, opus101, style - he's a Pom, can't help himself :D:P. He's a good guy, groks the subtleties of getting good sound - but enjoys the debate when he's trying to understand someone's angle! I've been talking to him for years, about the sort of things that matter ...


Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Ahhh, Mankind ... Porsche intellect, Trabant emotions ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fas42 said:

Hey, Alex, don't get too fussed about Richard's, opus101, style - he's a Pom, can't help himself :D:P

 Hi Frank

 I don't intend to get too fussed about him.

As I said , I have better things to do such as more experimentation with the JLH PSU add-on which I recently upgraded to around 4 FARADS simulated capacitance instead of the approx. 0.7FARADS of the original published design.

 This will soon be trialled at the output of a friend's 12V rail on his HDPlex.

 He has already had good results using the JLH design with a voltage regulator in front of it, as an add-on with this supply to power a USB Regen, but he would like to try powering a JS1 Ultracap supply from the HDPlex with the JLH further cleaning up the HDPlex +12V before going into the JS1

 

Regards

Alex 


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 30-05-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

The stamping of commercial CDs is basically an analog process so perhaps minor differences between CDs causes the CD player to have to work a little harder on some CDs than others, causing minor differences in sound quality.

 

However once the CD has been ripped, you're into the digital domain and any physical differences that once existed between these CDs no longer exists.

 

 

On the face of it, that seems to be a reasonable explanation, but ostensibly, what's on each CD are a series of pits embossed into the plastic which the playback laser registers as ones and zeros representing each sample. If the check sums between the same material stamped by two different plants is the same, then they should sound the same. I thought about jitter in once CD over the jitter in another, but it's a stamping process, the disc isn't moving when it's being made. One disc might be helically displaced from the same material made by another manufacturing plant, but once the read starts, being slightly off from another maker shouldn't matter. If the mastering laser was introducing jitter, a quick check by a QC person with a magnifying device should show that along with any other mastering defects encountered. so I think that should eliminate mastering jitter as the cause of the "difference". I really have no idea as to what the problem can possibly be that would cause identical program material to sound different from two different disc manufacturers. I don't doubt that it happens, mind you, I just can't imagine what would cause such a thing. 


George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

On the face of it, that seems to be a reasonable explanation, but ostensibly, what's on each CD are a series of pits embossed into the plastic which the playback laser registers as ones and zeros representing each sample. If the check sums between the same material stamped by two different plants is the same, then they should sound the same. I thought about jitter in once CD over the jitter in another, but it's a stamping process, the disc isn't moving when it's being made. One disc might be helically displaced from the same material made by another manufacturing plant, but once the read starts, being slightly off from another maker shouldn't matter. If the mastering laser was introducing jitter, a quick check by a QC person with a magnifying device should show that along with any other mastering defects encountered. so I think that should eliminate mastering jitter as the cause of the "difference". I really have no idea as to what the problem can possibly be that would cause identical program material to sound different from two different disc manufacturers. I don't doubt that it happens, mind you, I just can't imagine what would cause such a thing. 

 

I've never personally experienced what Barry reported on so I have no additional insights.

 

Alf shared with me a confidential document (with a Mission Impossible self-destructing link) a number of months ago that showed test results for different commercial CDs and there appears to be a lot of variation between them.

 

Whether these variations are enough to cause audible differences in certain environments, I don't know. I don't think Alf knows either.


“All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone listening to music.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I've never personally experienced what Barry reported on so I have no additional insights.

 

Alf shared with me a confidential document (with a Mission Impossible self-destructing link) a number of months ago that showed test results for different commercial CDs and there appears to be a lot of variation between them. Whether these variations are enough to cause audible differences in certain environments, I don't know.

 

I don't know either as I too have never experienced the phenomenon the Barry Diament described. 


George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

I don't know either as I too have never experienced the phenomenon the Barry Diament described. 

 

BTW, I no longer have Alf's report but I suspect that it was generated by a device like this:

 

http://www.datarius.com/products/stampermastercd.html


“All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone listening to music.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2017 at 4:52 PM, fas42 said:

Particularly interesting is that it required a subwoofer to allow the setup to shine. How I interpret this is that the performance of the Focal's electronics were compromised by trying to make its bass driver do everything - the current peaks required were generating too much interference, the power supplies were not good enough to minimise the impact of the sizeable current swings. Once the load had been taken off this area, by using the separate subwoofer, the Focal's electronics were operating in a far more benign electical environment - and the sound could be rendered cleanly.

One of the problems I had with the bass was room related.  The speakers needed to be placed appropriately for decent midrange and highs, but this created some problems with room modes.  I tried many different positions from the back walls and adjusting the cross-over controls on the main speakers, and none were satisfactory.  The sub allowed another degree of freedom, particularly with respect to the vertical room mode.  In addition to gain controls, the sub had a phase control and adjustable cross-over.

Unfortunately, all of these knobs required crawling about on the floor and forgetting what the sound had just been.  After two weeks of crawling about I got the calibrated microphone and analysis software and used that to get more-or less flat response in the bass from 30 Hz up.  There were still some peaks, which I then took out with a (digital) parametric equalizer.  This removed false dynamics on walking acoustic bass lines and made the side and back walls of the listening space disappear.  (I am listening facing into a corner.)  It took about 2 days after familiarizing myself with the measurement equipment to sort out the entire system.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Who cares if you aren't aware of a plausible mechanism  ?  Certainly not me.

 

 

 

here is a plausible mechanism:

 

 

Confirmation Bias in a bottle.jpg


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

here is a plausible mechanism:

 

 

Confirmation Bias in a bottle.jpg

 

Experienced DIY people are able to negate most of such problems by extensive listening over a period of time and becoming quite used to the sound, then reversing the modification to it's previous state, where any differences will usually be noticed immediately, and not always in favour of the modified version.


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 30-05-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Experienced DIY people are able to negate most of such problems by extensive listening over a period of time and becoming quite used to the sound, then reversing the modification to it's previous state, where any differences will usually be noticed immediately, and not always in favour of the modified version.

 

 

wrong - you obviously don't understand confirmation bias

 

tho I agree that is is a good idea to examine 'the trailing edge of the waveform'


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Experienced DIY people are able to negate most of such problems by extensive listening over a period of time and becoming quite used to the sound, then reversing the modification to it's previous state, where any differences will usually be noticed immediately, and not always in favour of the modified version.

 

Why would "experienced DIY people" be any less susceptible to expectation  or confirmation bias than any other person? Because DIY people are special? Give me a break. That's just another example of elitism...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, mansr said:

Have any of you ever looked into how CD players actually work?

 

 

yes!

 

you put the silver round thing in and push the button with the arrow on it

 

(sound like the guy with the digital watch??)


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

wrong - you obviously don't understand confirmation bias

 

 My bad. I answered for Expectation Bias, NOT Confirmation Bias.

I had a pile of quotes to reply to, and was in too much of a hurry.


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 30-05-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Why would "experienced DIY people" be any less susceptible to expectation  or confirmation bias than any other person? Because DIY people are special? Give me a break. That's just another example of elitism...

 

 That's typical E.E. elitist B.S. from you, (assuming that you ARE a qualified E.E. and not a WANNABE E.E. !)

 and exactly what many members have come to expect from you !

 

 Experienced DIY people are more aware of Expectation Bias, and go to far greater lengths to avoid it, not always with complete success though, which is why I mentioned about reversing the changes and listening afresh again.


"If you can't hear the difference between an original CD and a copy of your CD,

you might as well give up your career as a tester. The difference between a reconstituted FLAC and full size WAV is much less than that, but it does exist. - Cookie Marenco"

 

PROFILE UPDATED 30-05-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong - you obviously don't understand expectation bias

 

tho I agree that is is a good idea to examine 'the trailing edge of the waveform'

 

how would you want your medicines tested?  with controls or not??


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

here is a plausible mechanism:

 

 

Confirmation Bias in a bottle.jpg

If you hear it, it's real. How is it confirmation bias when you don't know whats gonna happen before you try something. I go in to most of my experiments with an open mind. Where is the conformation bias in that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think you hear it, it's real only in your mind. 

 

make sense?

 

you have 2 inputs into something - only one is the sound itself; the other one is conf. bias, and you need to control for that


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

wrong - you obviously don't understand expectation bias

 

tho I agree that is is a good idea to examine 'the trailing edge of the waveform'

 

how would you want your medicines tested?  with controls or not??

 

You really aren't "a scientist" as you *claim* are you Ralph?

 

 

12 minutes ago, Mordikai said:

If you hear it, it's real. How is it confirmation bias when you don't know whats gonna happen before you try something. I go in to most of my experiments with an open mind. Where is the conformation bias in that?

 

Agreed, bias does not exist in a vacuum as some would imply but it can potentially affect anyone. They understand medical trials even less than music trials. Potential biases need to be controlled such as with blinding.Without it tests are potentially but not necessarily biased. Ralph is ignorant of such things and keeps on pushing false statements which he knows little about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You really aren't "an MD" as you *claim* are you  Mullahphile nutso?


"The overwhelming majority [of audiophiles] have very little knowledge, if any, about the most basic principles and operating characteristics of audio equipment. They often base their purchasing decisions on hearsay, and the preaching of media sages. Unfortunately, because of commercial considerations, much information is rooted in increasing revenue, not in assisting the audiophile. It seems as if the only requirements for becoming an "authority" in the world of audio is a keyboard."

-- Bruce Rozenblit of Transcendent Sound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

If you think you hear it, it's real only in your mind. 

 

make sense?

 

you have 2 inputs into something - only one is the sound itself; the other one is conf. bias, and you need to control for that

I understand. i just don't agree that I have to do anything. If you want to control for c.b. goferit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...