16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

[PeterSt]

6 minutes ago, semente said:

21 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

That.

 

Optimised grounding over the whole system?

 

That is too easy - or too general; people wouldn't be able to work with this, as it requires 24 bits analyzers to get there.

The answer would be Yes though, but what to do with it.

 

Example of this would be the testifying for yourself (call it proof) that a laptop on batteries is or is not better in your chain. From my theories ((electrical) potential differences) I already know it won't work, people will think it works for the better, but the analyzer will show loads of additional noise (which is inaudible in itself).

 

Easier to work with is what's in my sig over at Phase : all switching supplies removed (similar). But it is not even easy to do that, and people might have difficulties with a. thinking of the computer monitor (the worst of all evil) and while they switch it off it might still leave the power cord with switching brick in. Again, you won't hear noise but the sound deteriorates massively (and if I say massively I mean that). Next point is that people may not be able to remove all switching supplies, because they don't have the separate mains rings means to begin with. And *if* they have, they tend to connect the (audio) computer to the one ring and the amplification and such to the other. Again wrong (because it creates potential difference on PE (Protective Earth).

It goes on and on and does not require new gear at all.

 

Of course all becomes moot when one is of the stance that all noise below a perceived audible level does not change a thing. It is the biggest mistake to make.

[PeterSt]

6 hours ago, fas42 said:

via any mechanism

 

Radiation being the new kid on the block. Well, of course we know about this for long, but influencing it easily is something else. Point here is also : it may influence about everything - we just don't know that because it FFT-measures below capabilities (OK, over here). The radiation itself can be measured though.

 

Here I just posted something of which we all may think someone like me and everybody else is dreaming nicely along because they like to hear what they hear or the other way around. I can't even begin thinking of where an how to measure this, if we only understand that this should be (?) about the impact of radiation. Let's say that only when you can prove to yourself that this isn't changing a thing to the sound in your rig, you may be correct about it. But I know already : you won't even try because it can't make a difference. And with that, all that will bet a 10K that there is a most profound difference to be heard, are fools ?

I am not trying to be suggestive, but that's how it goes, right ?

 

To be clear : I won't be able to measure this, unless it would be about an eye diagram in the USB data. This in itself is already moot because it shouldn't make a difference to the sound (because of the digital-digital domain we're in). I already do not claim that there will be a difference in the eye diagram (I did not try yet) because I now merely think it is the influence on to whatever other component(s) in the chain. Well, happy hunting with that. And yes, I hear you : shield that components better. Sure ! good hint.

[PeterSt]

17 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

I might have to point out that a lot of this musical "movement" started in the UK.

 

OffTopic : I find it mighty interesting to hear through the "why" of Punk. And from there the music is better, or say that you start to hear the music in it.

 

ProRock is for me the best example of it all. It has such clear messages and coincidentally those guys could really make music. Perform it is another thing, as I think Punk might do that better (once you get the message in advance).

 

Btw, I didn't live in the age of Brahms and Beethoven et all. So I don't feel the connection.

The fact that my father played the main viola in the orchestra, always practising and my mother always practising for her conservatorium degree on the piano-wing, apparently didn't help a thing. I have been lost forever in screamers like Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple and Uriah Heep. The Who not much - I don't know why (screams too much ). Grand Funk even more, don't know why either.

And a 1000 more.

But I hardly play it any more. It doesn't contain much for improvement of the playback (says me). That would be the mere electronic genres (says me but with proof). Hip-Hop can do it too, just because it is more difficult (believe it or not) for the digital system.

 

Classical too, is all about messages. But I don't understand them. I wasn't there and probably don't want to be there. My bringing up has failed.

 

 

[PeterSt]

Something else : People like @sementemay be able to recognize the importance of the BBC ~1 hour documentaries on about anything related to important "rock" icons. I just mention the documentary about the making of Paranoid (Black Sabbath's second album as far as I know). It gives you insight on how things really went and why. There's also one about Debby Harry (call it Punk) and so many more in any direction and angle.

Assuming you guys over in the US don't get to see this, you may miss out. I suppose though that much of it can be found on YouTube if you know what to look for. Here's the Documentary on the making of Paranoid  with the notice that it doesn't seem the best for stutter free reception. But if may give you an idea.

[PeterSt]

Just now, PeterSt said:

Here's the Documentary on the making of Paranoid

 

Warning : If you like Black Sabbath for its heavy guitar sound (not for George), maybe don't watch this. It shows how Tony Lommi plays such a guitar on the knee without any effort with a tiny toggling plectrum, not showing the heavy sound at all, while the sound is there all right. Pure deception !

On stage of course, it all looks different.

 

PS: The first of Black Sabbath was the very first LP I bought. Sniff.

[PeterSt]

Very, very well put.

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, numlog said:

I recommend checking out this track, it sounds remarkably holographic through headphones.

 

Yes, that would be the stuff I mean, for utilizing a system's merits. However, I would not recommend this as "music" of any kind. Indeed it is about sounds (OK, with a rhythm). 

Maybe use this one as a bit of more music, to some : 

 

 

(I have a 3000 more of such test-signal-albums)

 

Shouldn't be used on headphones as the real sounds emerge in mid air (when the reproduction is delineated enough)

Alex's moth also appears in there.

 

[PeterSt]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

The .flac version should sound even better than in .mp4

 

Hey Alex,

I never listen to YouTubes. I just searched for something like this for you guys, to give an indication of the type of music which I regularly refer to. Most of if contains all - from sub low (under 20Hz) up to (fairly) complete square (like this one) or dirac like pulses (vinyl ticks, which just is a hot thing in that scene (of "music")). I wanted to put this opposite to the Plastikman YouTube @numlog gave, because while I full heartedly agree "we" should use such "sounds" for testing and improving our gear, we better not use plain test signals like that, while my wife already dedicate explicit "test signal" to the (Phutureprimitive) link I just provided. And really, with at least 3000 albums around of such stuff, there's a lot to listen to ONCE you're into the improvement of the representation of such often "noises", which thus contain really all. So just saying (without further underlaying message) : Beach Boys and Olivia Newton John are also fine of course, but the moths are hard to find in such music, while this is all about that (for say "best systems").

And maybe now you understand better my "electric butterfly" description (which emerges with the Mach III / Lush^2 combination) because when things really work out, such moths literally shatter through the room. And mind you, no such thing I ever experienced only 2 months or so back.

 

All in 16 bits of course. 

 

Peter

[PeterSt]

14 hours ago, sandyk said:

Looks like Peter St. is also wrong, as he verified my reports in a very early thread 10 years ago in C.A. What would Peter know about Computers, DACs etc. ?

 

Mwah ... Alex ... This is not entirely correct. The so-called fact that I seem to be definitive about perceiving a difference, which btw was together with a visitor I had over, only lead to creating a part in the XXHighEnd software which would eliminate any possible differences springing from storage location. Functionally equally behaving files are physically not the same at all, meaning : the net result for bits and bytes and whatever which functionally will tell you that e.g. a Word document won't change a single word or space or anything even after copying it father-son a million times, may lead to as many physically differently organized files for those bits and bytes and everything which still will present the same functional results.

 

a. I claimed that from there on (new XXHighEnd version) the differences would be eliminated;

(because I created a means which would present a 100% equal physical representation of the file each time it was put up for playback, no matter the source location and its physical representation there)

 

b. I explicitly claimed not to further investigate it per my analysis means of comparing files which would show any difference at the DAC output, even if impeded by a knot in the interlinks (which indeed changes sound);

(with by sub text as of then that I very explicitly would not WANT TO know about differences because they CAN NOT exist, as I know a few things about computers and computing indeed - call it head in sand protection)

 

c. It was you, Alex, who told that the differences were still there, even when using that new XXHighEnd feature.

(which was not and never discussed further, already not because you were not an XXHighEnd user (never obtained a license))

 

And to be complete ... I developed my analysis software within XXHighEnd, always with *your* test files because I had to use some test files, with the irony of when the software was ready, I never compared your files for the purpose because

... head in sand.

So my analysis software would show differences if they were there at all, but I don't even wanted to know about it because I wouldn't be able to explain differences if they were there to begin with. I know enough of computers to know that no storage mechanisms exist to store the data which would be able to incur for different sound, unless what I just described for physical representation but which I eliminated as explained (OK, told about).

 

Kind regards,

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

6 hours ago, esldude said:

Does that mean local cops in small towns are mp3  (AAC if it is a rich small town)?

 

Not necessarily. Cops can be streamed as well and as it looks, soon in 24 bits by Qobusters.

In the case that does not work or is undesired, we'd have to live with the QA police.

 

16 bit cops have distorted sirens. Nobody would want that.

[PeterSt]

7 hours ago, fas42 said:

Perhaps what is needed is 30 bits, err, pieces of silver to appease them ... .

 

Only extra shields.

[PeterSt]

25 minutes ago, firedog said:

I have an issue b/c I can't understand any cop who hasn't applied DSP correction before he/she speaks to me. 

 

It really isn't that difficult. Tweak the noise to be 70dB or so down, and their FFT fools them fools.

[PeterSt]

8 hours ago, gmgraves said:

I've never driven in Louisiana, but I'm originally from Virgina and I recall that the State Troopers there are really strict.

 

Never saw a State Trooper (I drive too fast to see them). Only collecting Firemen (they do that at crossings with traffic lights (they can turn them to red I suppose) and I never drive to red lights).

 

Now let's see. That was in a Dodge Charger. What car do you guys drive in, when in Louisiana ? any 16 cylinders around ?

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, gmgraves said:

That is disgusting. Even if it is legal, it's downright dishonest and immoral.

 

Move to Belgium ?

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, esldude said:

He said "have good evening go on ahead." 

 

And then you turned around, right ?

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

Mankind is constantly having to deal with the instinct to go tribal;

 

Hey hey, this is no Australia, man. This is the real Nutbush country. No Mad Max land. 

[PeterSt]

Anything else for a 24 bit of change ?