Blue or red pill?

[Spacehound]

12 hours ago, Cebolla said:

 

I hope for your sake this rabbit hole doesn't go as far as you (illegally) capturing the streamed bits from TIDAL, just so you can prove that they're exactly the same as the bits from the same named album track files stored on your NAS. Otherwise, how can you prove they're exactly the same bits?

In the UK it's not illegal. If they send stuff along 'my' broadband wire, (which is not owned by Tidal) I can do whatever I want with it.

 

In the UK we cannot sign away our 'natural' or government provided rights even if we want to. So  it follows that most 'restrictive' agreements are not worth the paper or display they are written on. If Tidal, Microsoft, Apple, or whoever don't like that they should remember that our government did not force them to operate here.

[Spacehound]

1 minute ago, manisandher said:

 

No, I wouldn't be comfortable doing this. Depending on the track, I tend to hone in on different areas on which to concentrate. E.g. for one of the tracks I have in mind, it's the singers clapping - from the local folder the claps are full and round, from the NAS they're more edgy and harder on the ears. I need to be well-familiar with the track in order to determine which area.

 

Mani.

It's an extremely kind  offer and I admire that you bothered. 

I'm near Southampton so it's not far. I am 'minded' to take up your offer so may be in touch via PM. My costs are insignificant so don't matter.

[Spacehound]

22 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I am late to this game...i am confused what the disbelief is about?

Of course a file from a nas would sound different than playing from local pc?

Does someone think they would sound the same even though different interfaces and different circuitry?  That's ridiculous.

 

Mansr has always sounded very logical, knowledgeable, and believable, i think there must be some misunderstanding??

"Of course..."

There are many good reasons they should sound exactly the same, but that doesn't prove that they don't.

Just a sample - in general only the DAC  should  matter.

 

Also remember you can't 'prefer' anything unless you can hear a difference. So there is no 'good or  'bad' in a blind test, such tests are 100% objective -  'yes'  or 'no'.

 

 

[Spacehound]

50 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

my guess is that they are both subjective and objective...my guess is that you would see different noise dependent on interface, and subjectively, the sound is notably better...don't even need to try hard.

No, a blind test is binary, you can or you can't. That many people don't seem to understand that is what causes all the arguments.

[Spacehound]

48 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Also consider this....if the digital source doesn't make a difference why would a professional reviewer suggest the SOTM sounds better than a sonore using the same dac.  what makes them different.  Also Sonore themselves sell a micro rendu and an ultra rendu....both are just digital streamers, but one sounds better than the other....clearly clocking and noise makes a difference in the digital domain.

 

 

Justifying  their paid existence as an 'expert'.

 

And of course these 'experts' will say the fancier one   is better because it costs more.  If they don't Sonore will tell  all their friends at the 'Industry Club'  and the 'expert' won't get any more free stuff. or stuff on  'loan' as it's also called.

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I am late to this game...i am confused what the disbelief is about?

Of course a file from a nas would sound different than playing from local pc?

Does someone think they would sound the same even though different interfaces and different circuitry?  That's ridiculous.

 

Mansr has always sounded very logical, knowledgeable, and believable, i think there must be some misunderstanding??

After those two posts I will get to DACS, which is more complicated.

DACS have several inputs and some at better than others (which of course is part of my "It all depends on the DAC" comment).

 

BUT - most  DACS don't have a network port. So you have to use a DAC  that does or put a box like a Sonore in front.

So instead of  just listening  to supposedly identical files on two different  sources you have  altered something else too.

So your ears can't tell you anything about those two 'identical' files..

 

I've got  a  box  that is both a USB DAC   and a network player,  so at least the 'digital to analog' section is the same. And  that should mean that if the files are truly identical they will sound the same. Don't worry about timing differences between the two different things the files reside on, there NO  timing in a file so it can't be 'wrong'.

[Spacehound]

4 minutes ago, Shadders said:

The blue pills are called Viagra.

 

Do you know the correct name (pharmaceutical description) for Viagra  ??

 

Mycoxaflopin.

 

Da boom, tsshhh

Is he providing naughty ladies too?

[Spacehound]

15 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Since when do *we* require strange ADC setups or ABX etc. ? I never ran into the necessity and you know it. So let's not forget that you will be listening together with real persons who seem to be adult enough to hear the things you both/all hear. Never has been different. It is only that the other(s) don't know yet. But they will see (under your supervision).

 

What would fail (and always fails if you ask me) is the ADC part of the project. It obfuscates and a down errors are usually made. Also of it would be able to record in 768.

 

All it requires is at least two pairs of ears and a pair of mouths to talk to each other about findings. Do it alone won't work because you (we) hear what we like to hear. So it needs pointing out. After one time, the other can do it too.

Of course you understand that I am only talking to the broad audience, because you and me already know this.

 

And a warning : whatever it is that may happen during playback directly vs via NAS and "the influence", would be under the influence of the ADC and cabling and groundloops and what not just the same.

And as you know, Mani, AB is not even necessary. Just play different tracks is sufficient.

 

Last thing : It would be quite difficult to set up playback through XXHighEnd which actively tries to eliminate NAS etc. influence, up to the wild degree you know about. So might you think that you can eliminate the caching while playing music from the NAS ... you can't. Or the other way around : if you'd copy files from your NAS to local yourself, I would debunk that by claiming you did the same as XXHighEnd did without doing so.

Of course this puts the extra emphasis on the (still !) differences, but they will also be beyond reason for you guys. So you *are* correct on the thesis, but you won't prove it by any means, especially not an ADC. Ears yes, though.

 

I would stick to sipping the Scotch and have a nice time talking through how to really test this, or how to report the findings (with my promise that you will both succeed on that) to the public. Start with your USB cables to get in the good mood. It is all so easy ...

 

Peter

There's a brand new fast  and non-stop train   from Amsterdam to London .

[Spacehound]

3 minutes ago, Shadders said:

If there are, then i don't expect there to be any listening......

If there aren't enough naughty ladies we will have to try Lavorgna's 'mother' idea. I shall bring the small  china urn she's in just in case..

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I agree to some extent...at least as far as "hype and hoopla" about perceived improvement.

 

To be honest.....i am throwing everything i have said about enet out the window after just about 5 seconds ago....usb is sounding amazing for the first time in my life....

I've got about 20 ways of playing the same thing, from PC disc 'direct' to USB, from PC disc to PC memory to USB.

Same but via network.

Same as both but using a external USB disk.

Same as both but using a NAS disc.

From the NAS disc not using the computer at  all to the network player, which is also  the  USB DAC in the above.

To my old low cost  Network player but using its 'passthrough' to the USB DAC/Network player above in coax mode.  (That's like  a Sonore installation though it's a coax output  to the following DAC  rather than USB.).

Etc. Etc.

 

As long as I don't change the DAC/Network player I don't hear the slightest  difference between any of them.

 

I DO hear differences at different times of day. At about 2 or 3 early in the morning  when local electrical activity is presumably low it's better (though the noise when 'playing silence' is inaudible at full volume with my ear against a speaker in both instances). But that   'improvement' will be on the 'analogue' part, hich is only the last half of the DAC/Network player and what follows, which is just a power amp (I don't use a preamp) and speakers.

 

dCS Rossini DAC with lots of inputs including USB as well as being a network player--------->.Naim NAP250DR--------->.Tannoy Kensingtons

 

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, Cebolla said:

 

Gven that it's currently illegal to rip CDs in the UK for whatever reason, what makes you think that ripping online music service streams is any way different?

 

"Legal streaming of music is also under threat. Stream-ripping, by which internet users remove and store content away from its original advertising-revenue generating platform, is becoming a significant problem.

A report commissioned by the IPO and PRS for Music has revealed that 15% of internet users have been involved in stream-ripping. It also reveals that nearly a quarter (24%) of 'stream-rippers' believe that their action were not infringing IP rights."

Source:

GOV.UK Press Release - Illegal streaming threatens copyright progress

 

See also:

BBC News - Stream-ripping is 'fastest growing' music piracy.'

Because the new  law does not cover streaming. Even if it did there is the 'worthless agreement' issue. That's far older so has 'priority. and they can't repeal it because it covers too many things.

[Spacehound]

6 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

There should be nothing different done that may possibly degrade the results , UNTIL there are clear results either way, then go for it ! 

I have tried several times previously to capture the results via a 24/96 recorder and the extra A/D conversion has resulted in both versions sounding virtually identical again, but not quite as good sounding as the original.

It's meaningless anyway. The actual D/A or A/D conversion is the hard part and is never 100% accurate. So going from one to the other and back again .....need I say more?

[Spacehound]

16 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

yea, in hind-sight, and re-reading, i was rude....my thinking is that if someone will go through great lengths to do a/b sq testing, that it should include highres DSD.  I was just disappointed, when i found out that it was only for streaming flac files, when i was first quite excited....i think I was too emotional about my disappointment....anyway, my apologies to all.

Apologise? Why? This isn't a classroom.

 

Streaming is this week's new fashion. Soon it will become as boring a subject as MQA, we will just do it, like walking.

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, plissken said:

 

Viagra is gender blind...

I'm not 

[Spacehound]

4 hours ago, plissken said:

 

Just saying don't judge 

I shall judge as much as I want. If we  don't judge PC will make all these other things compulsory real soon.

 

And in the UK I can legally refuse to sell a cake to anyone who doesn't meet with my approval.

"The World's Most Exclusive Cake Maker" might well be a very successful business

[Spacehound]

2 minutes ago, psjug said:

Well, I don't know the law and I don't know if your cake business would succeed, but I did just read this and the writer is pretty funny

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/should-we-all-have-the-right-not-to-bake-a-cake/

In UK law selling stuff is asking people to make    "an offer to buy".

 

Which the seller is legally entitled to refuse without giving a reason.  It eliminates all this 'cake' stuff and all  other  similar nonsense  

[Spacehound]

18 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

coming in late so apologies if already covered but:

What exactly is the null hypothesis?

What variables will/won't be controlled for?

When/ how will the null hypothesis be rejected or accepted, and at what level of statistical significance?

 

 I get if neither participant/s wants to make this a scholarly exercise and just keep it a bit of fun.

 

• <quote> Playing the same exact file using two different players or the same player with different settings can easily invalidate the test. You’re then comparing two players and their internal processing and not two storage devices. That’s why capturing the digital output to the DAC is critical to ensure that the same digital samples are being sent to it in both cases, as Mansr already said he’ll do.</quote>

 

My question is does the same digital samples captured really control for the variables of different players? I mean, say if they were played at slightly different volumes, could they still have the same "digital output"?

 

Regarding expectation or confirmation bias, this should be controlled by the blind testing and the agreed upon test methodology.

 

I agree with the poster about ideally not over discussing the outcomes prior to the experiment (like that MQA test a while back) and even just knowing its an 'experiment'/test *some* would say influences behavior (Hawthorne effect). However, in this case both participants likely have an agenda and so it gets back to controlling for biases. However, it is very possible IMO that the more it is discussed, the more Mani will feel potentially stressed about performing (....the blue pills may help this??). I believe it is important that Mani, who has set the challenge, feels comfortable that somehow the ground rules have not been changed from his original intention or design.

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter. Similar things have  been tried often before. Those who believe in myth and magic will continue to do so  whatever the test result because the methods, including any listening tests, blind or not,  are "faulty" as they don't coincide with their beliefs.

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

there is a certain futility to be sure.

 

I don't think its "faulty" to question beliefs if they don't match your particular experience. I also don't think it is "faulty" to question whether that experience  is somehow an illusion.

I agree with all that, but as I said, but the 'myth and magic' crowd will say the methods are faulty. They always do. Not, of course, that they would have taken the trouble to understand the methods anyway.

 

And though they are somewhat 'opposed', both Mani and Mansr know what they are doing.

[Spacehound]

5 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

They may be right

 

 

 

always?

 

 

 

enlighten us

 

 

 

would you prefer they didn't?

It's not impossible.

 

It appears so.

 

They are unlikely to spend much time  studying  something they 100% misunderstand from  the moment it's switched on and which they do not wish to understand as it would force them out of their cozy 'analogue' safe space.

EG, while imitche's post above is   true  any effect from it  is confined entirely to the 'last half' of the DAC and  what follows.

 

Of course not.

[Spacehound]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

 A typically arrogant reply from an E.E. who appears to think that E.E.s are GODs, and infallible !

 This belief system applies just as much to E.E.s as much as Audiophiles, whenever their deeply ingrained beliefs are questioned.

 Just a reminder that without Subjective reports, there would be no need for Objective measurements, and no incentive to further improve an electronic product other than on how attractive and easy to use it is , as well as the cost of the product .

 (Enter the " Bean Counters" )

 Add to that, product lifetime issues built into designs, so that they had a limited lifetime, so that the public would keep periodically buying replacements. This appears to be the modern way, and not how it used to be with products that often  kept working as designed for 30 years or more, with perhaps simple component replacements such as noisy volume controls.

Even the main large filter capacitors in many designs would last considerably longer if proper attention was paid by the designer to heat issues due to component placement and good ventilation.

A good example of that, was electrolytic filter capacitors too close to vacuum tubes etc.

"The Colloms" is worshipped as a god and claims to be an  a EE.

Mind you, he claims he's an "Expert Witness" too. What of he doesn't say, so presumably murders, car crashes, earthquakes, wars,  that sort of routine stuff.  Gods do get to see quite a lot,  I would think.

 

As for other EE's they are just people qualified in their field, by both education/examination and known expertise if they are members of professional bodies.  Much like Doctors, Airline pilots,  Quantum mechanics,  Vets,  etc are in their fields. All are  totally useless of course. 

 

BTW: What does  your reply have to do with what I posted?

[Spacehound]

3 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

^^^^  I am mostly objectivist...but i do believe that "some people's hearing" may be much better than the mass majority, but i believe that most of the "subjective" opinions are those that have bought into marketing hype.

 

Just think, every year we have millions of new products available and they always sound better every year so the market can continue, but you have to "listen very hard" to actually know it is better....and we have been "listening very hard" year after year, and will probably continue for the next 100 years....at what point can we "listen very hard" so many years to hear only the slightest differences, that we can't distinguish in DBT, and not even consistently with our own ears, and not for every song, genre, frequency, instrument, etc...and then we have the law of diminishing returns.....How many times have we heard, this is the greatest DAC, or best amp of the year, and not get any "oh wow, totally new level" to realize that a lot of this stuff is marketing hype.

 

Sure maybe slightly different sound, but SQ improvement that isn't measurable year after year of "listening very hard"....

 

I even fool myself some time....then once in awhile i will put on vinyl record and think "OH WOW, that sounds really good".

Most of us are 'subjective' in the end - we buy what we  like, though some of us may look at a magazine or two to see if it's got a flat frequency response or whatever. I do that sometimes.

But I've also bought stuff from a UK manufacturer simply because they've  been going for donkeys years in the UK's  "Last of the Summer Wine" TV 'happy old farts' series  county. Sugden amplifiers. They don't need to advertise much and their efforts  sound much the same as everyone else's  decent amplifiers.

 

But there is a point in 'computer' audio that divides  what doesn't matter at all from what does and from where 'external influences'  don't matter at all from where they do.

 

And that is in the DAC where the 'timing' and  digital to analogue conversion is done. After that, including the 'latter' half of the DAC things start to matter. Before it they don't.

 

But some people, often 'set in their ways' and lacking 'technical' knowledge in this area, do not understand 'digital' at all (btw - quite a lot of manufacturers take advantage of this) so try and stay in their 'safe spaces'  in any way they can.. This includes insulting the entire body of (electronic) 'engineers'  and the entire field of engineering knowledge, of those who disagree with them while desperately clinging  to those very few who do NOT   in fact agree with them 'in general'  but may have tested 'statistically' with their ears on some point  and their  'statistical'  findings did not actively disagree.

 

And of course THIS is what Mani's test is about.

[Spacehound]

28 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Perhaps just like the current fascination in C.A. with Streaming, where the quality of the streamed music is highly unlikely to  come close to that of a well optimised system at home using your own source material ?

Why's that?

 

And don't forget that is  what the test is partly about.  And you aren't going. And if it goes 'against' you they don't know what they are doing.

[Spacehound]

24 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

.....so no definite conclusions can be drawn from the results obtained.....

There ya go. You've decided already,  Before it's been done.

 

Thank you for proving my point.

[Spacehound]

34 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

......Why am I not surprised that you can't be bothered going ?

 

Changed yer mind then?

 

How convenient. From your previous post you assumed I was a dead cert for going.

 

And as Mani, totally unprompted,  bet mansr, it's MANI who has the expectation bias, not mansr. But of course that doesn't  fit your agenda.

I'm not responding  to your stuff anymore on this thread. It's way off topic. I was just responding to  a question from Neuroscience.

[Spacehound]

18 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

What’s to stress about if you’re 100% certain you can hear the differences, you are listening in your own home, listening to your own system and music of your choosing? This is the case in this test, is it not?

Precisely.

 

But at first he accidentally said that the bias only happened to those he disagreed with.

 

When I later said that he had got the person he disagreed with  and the person he agreed with backwards  he changed his mind and said bias works both ways