Blue or red pill?

[plissken]

On 2/10/2018 at 9:21 AM, Spacehound said:

Is he providing naughty ladies too?

 

Viagra is gender blind...

[botrytis]

20 minutes ago, manisandher said:

 

It's going to be interesting coming up with another explanation if mansr hears the differences I (and pretty much everyone else who's taken a listen) do, and yet the ADC captures are identical.

 

But this is jumping the gun somewhat.

 

Mani.

 

Mani,

 

It depends. You should not be discussing this, because it adds a bias that the topic has already been talked about. This is the same as going to an audio demonstration and the demonstrator tells you what to expect. Your brain fills in the rest based on what you were told. This is an interesting thread, but unless you do not talk about things, you are adding expectation bias. Not talking about it, means blind test and this would have been more reliable. This test basically means nothing now.

 

Cheers,

 

Bot

[manisandher]

7 minutes ago, botrytis said:

This test basically means nothing now.

 

What test?

 

I didn't write anything in my previous post that I haven't written before.

 

Mani.

[botrytis]

 test Whether it is or is not an 'official' test is besides the point. You are adding expectation bias in this listening. I try to just invite people without explaining, if there they hear something, it is not due to expectation.

[Shadders]

34 minutes ago, manisandher said:

 

It's going to be interesting coming up with another explanation if mansr hears the differences I (and pretty much everyone else who's taken a listen) do, and yet the ADC captures are identical.

 

But this is jumping the gun somewhat.

 

Mani.

Hi,

Not sure what the test will be - but any ADC in your house will be different to anything played through the speakers etc.  from which the ADC was taken from.

 

If it is the difference between the same track played via NAS, PC, or CD transport optical output etc., to a DAC,  then buffering and noise can be the reason for the differences heard. If you cannot ensure that noise and buffering are the same for each source, then differences are possible.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

[manisandher]

5 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 test Whether it is or is not an 'official' test is besides the point. You are adding expectation bias in this listening. I try to just invite people without explaining, if there they hear something, it is not due to expectation.

 

Yes, I can see the value in this.

 

Let's just see what happens on the day.

 

Mani.

[pkane2001]

21 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

For sure. My feeling is to use XXHighEnd for the most part (there's so much you can play around with), and HQPlayer for any streaming vs. local file comparison we might make. In all comparisons, the compared files will be bit-for-bit identical. I've discussed how we would verify that this is the case.

 

Mani.

 

Ok, just want to make sure that the same player software is used, with the same settings, when doing A/B comparisons -- there's a lot a player can do to the bits before these are sent out to the DAC, even if the source files are exactly the same.

 

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Ok, just want to make sure that the same player software is used, with the same settings, when doing A/B comparisons -- there's a lot a player can do to the bits before these are sent out to the DAC, even if the source files are exactly the same.

The digital output will be captured and compared.

[Spacehound]

2 hours ago, plissken said:

 

Viagra is gender blind...

I'm not 

[Ralf11]

"Temporal microstructure" ... means nothing, but could mean something 

 

I wonder if it could be analogized (not to just resolution or pixel count) but to micro-contrast in optics...

[plissken]

3 hours ago, Spacehound said:

I'm not 

 

Just saying don't judge 

[mansr]

36 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

"Temporal microstructure" ... means nothing, but could mean something 

That's what makes it so insidious.

 

36 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

I wonder if it could be analogized (not to just resolution or pixel count) but to micro-contrast in optics...

Drawing analogies between audio and imaging is fraught with peril as there is no acoustic equivalent to the optical lens.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

That's what makes it so insidious.

 

Drawing analogies between audio and imaging is fraught with peril as there is no acoustic equivalent to the optical lens.

Yes, exactly. 

 

You can take a still photo and look at it in optics even though your eye never really sees it quite this way.  There is no equivalent still unchanging way to record audio and hear it in one instant.  You can look at a photo, take your time shift your attention.  Audio is not amenable to doing that with your ear.  

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, esldude said:

Yes, exactly. 

 

You can take a still photo and look at it in optics even though your eye never really sees it quite this way.  There is no equivalent still unchanging way to record audio and hear it in one instant.  You can look at a photo, take your time shift your attention.  Audio is not amenable to doing that with your ear.  

It's worse than that. Due to the optical focusing system, an image has distortions with no equivalent whatsoever in a sound recording. That said, there are valid comparisons to be made. For example, aliasing from undersampling might be seen as a moiré pattern in an image a brick wall.

[sandyk]

5 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Ok, just want to make sure that the same player software is used, with the same settings, when doing A/B comparisons -- there's a lot a player can do to the bits before these are sent out to the DAC, even if the source files are exactly the same.

 

Not if both comparison files are saved to, AND played back from the same storage device, whether HDD,SSD,USB memory  OR even as adjoining tracks on a CD-R.

Mansr will find no differerences looking at DIGITAL files with identical checksums even if hears differences himself !!!

[esldude]

49 minutes ago, mansr said:

It's worse than that. Due to the optical focusing system, an image has distortions with no equivalent whatsoever in a sound recording. That said, there are valid comparisons to be made. For example, aliasing from undersampling might be seen as a moiré pattern in an image a brick wall.

A bit off topic.  Some good optics and seeing things real time with my eyes can put me in a trance more easily than the music can.  I get lost in the cosmos as quaint as that sounds. 

 

Plus my current smartphone can take an image if simply held in front of the eyepiece which is pretty darn good versus what I see real time. The recordings on my smart phone of audio is nowhere close.  (oh and just a side comment.  I put music from my smartphone in a post of several dacs once and it wasn't obvious to anyone other than John Swenson).  

[pkane2001]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Not if both comparison files are saved to, AND played back from the same storage device, whether HDD,SSD,USB memory  OR even as adjoining tracks on a CD-R.

Mansr will find no differerences looking at DIGITAL files with identical checksums even if hears differences himself !!!

 

You’re missing my point.. 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.

[beerandmusic]

will there be an osciilloscope available to check the input to the dac circuitry?

my guess is that if there is an audible difference it will be due to the noise signature caused by differences in timing.

[sandyk]

9 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

You’re missing my point.. 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.

 

Why would you complicate matters by using different players or different settings when you wish to rule out other influences ?

Mansr will NOT find any differences between DIGITAL files with identical checksums even if he reports hearing differences under correctly performed DBT conditions !

[pkane2001]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Mansr will NOT find any differences between DIGITAL files with identical checksums even if he reports hearing differences under correctly performed DBT conditions !

 

Anyone taking bets?

 

[beerandmusic]

12 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Anyone taking bets?

 

 

15 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Why would you complicate matters by using different players or different settings when you wish to rule out other influences ?

Mansr will NOT find any differences between DIGITAL files with identical checksums even if he reports hearing differences under correctly performed DBT conditions !

if they both hear differences, they will find differences in the a-d files, if quality a-d equpment.

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

That's what makes it so insidious.

 

Drawing analogies between audio and imaging is fraught with peril as there is no acoustic equivalent to the optical lens.

 

 

Flipper and his Cetacean buddies differ with this assertion!!

[sandyk]

52 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

Flipper and his Cetacean buddies differ with this assertion!!

Flipper was female.The part was played by 5 female dolphins.

[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

[rando]

Can you legally pick up a free range cake out of a pasture and serve it in such a way the recipient can't help but eat some?