Jump to content
IGNORED

Track preload affects sonics - HELP!!!


Recommended Posts

On 3/4/2019 at 11:28 AM, Jim Smith said:

I wrote about this phenomenon a bit over 10 years ago in Get Better Sound, referring to how many CD players & transports sounded better if you let them play a bit and then restarted the CD at the beginning. bad-news.gif

I haven't mentioned the effect with some computer sources, but it definitely exists - at least with my MBPs.

Letting a track play for 10 seconds or so - then restarting it - is not subtle. what.gif

This is irregardless of what track preload settings I can make with Audirvana.

 

I also use Maintain's Cocktail to help me eliminate unwanted/unneeded processes.

Also, restarting the computer (which clears the used ram), and clearing all caches still makes no difference with this effect.


In other words, EACH track sounds better if played briefly and then restarted.

Thought I would come out of the frustration closet and see if anyone can suggest a fix, while staying with the MBPs, which I need when traveling for RoomPlay voicing sessions... blush.pngBow.gif

 

Hi Jim - 

I remember reading an essay on this, which I am quite irritated I cannot find to link here. 

 

In any case, from memory, I think that the effect is quite real and easily documented, but I think it has something to do with auditory memory not with playback performance.

 

The second time round, you already know what to expect and your attention is better focused, or something like that.  In any case, it would be interesting to see what real honest to John measurements say about it.

 

I am pretty sure my memory is correct, but I wouldn't bet a beer on it. :) 

 

Yours,

-Paul 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

You realize this is the guy with the 10 pages of commonly known stuff inflated into an entire book, right?

 

It's like arguing with a used car salesman about camshaft lift and combustion flame spread velocity.

 

 

Well, I would rather have that "used car salesman" help with setting up a system or room than almost anyone else I can name. It will sound better with his advice, or will work a lot better. 

 

Best advice he gave me?  Put your *wife's* chair in the sweet spot. (grin) 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

This may be relevant in some instances ... there are so many variables; one of the behaviours I've run into a far bit is that the sound will start off coming across well, and then steadily over some period, could be minutes, could be hours, will slowly degrade - one attempts to convince oneself that it's "all in the mind"; then you put on some album that screams at you, "this sounds awful!!".

 

What's happening is that various electrical factors are stabilising, or steadily shifting into a state where they cause the key circuitry to stop functioning as well as it should - it's not your imagination!! To solve the problem may require some detective work - but all these issues can be resolved .

 

I hate to say it Fas old man, but a cause for that which is much easer to understand is that every system has auditory flaws that cause listening fatigue - sooner or later. In general, the better the system, the longer one can listen without [damn typo! -> without <- ]  the onset of fatigue.  

 

It could be that sound is not really changing. Only hard and fast measurements will tell us which answer is the real reason. (Or point to another reason entirely.) 

 

Have you measured the output of a device and actually seen it change?  That would be very compelling evidence for what you believe. :)

 

-Paul 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

Yes, that would be so in many cases. However, getting a rig up to the levels I'm interested in means the onset of fatigue never happens; we've had previous setups running from early in the morning until we go to bed, with the sound going throughout the house - not a problem.

 

I am not sure, but I think auditory fatigue always sets in, with any system. I could be wrong there, as that is not something I have ever really looked up any studies about.  At least, I have never heard of a system that can play without people getting tired of it. 

 

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

I would have been tempted to investigate here, but for the fact that others who believe in the subjective approach, who also have access to plenty of precision measuring gear, have always stated that they are unable to find clear numbers that link to what they hear. Why should I think I can do better?

 

It's been trivial to always hear what's going on, for me. If sound seems wrong, then it is wrong - this attitude has worked for 3 decades; the goal has always been invisibility of the playback mechanism, ability to go to any sane volume with zero audible issues, zero disturbing anomalies in what one hears - I tend not to come across many systems with this attributes; so, not motivated in finding numbers for this at the moment ... ^_^

 

Well, subjectivist, objectivist, or just an independent cuss,  measurements are a tool that helps us understand what we hear, see, feel,  and believe. I certainly do not believe measurements are the beginning and end of the story, especially about audio.  I can't think of a good way of testing to validate this other than measurements though. 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Dennis, esldude, has provided us with some good data to play with, in the 8th copy threads. The final copy is obviously distorted, because one can hear the difference. So, work out how to measure what has happened to the degraded sample, in the areas where one can clearly hear the variation - if one can correlate a measurable difference to the audible symptoms, then a good start to having a better tool has been made.

 

He did - thought he posted it? It was kinda embarrassing because while I could pick out the copies, I also rather preferred them. Over the originals. ;)

 

But in this case, why would a file sound different the second time it is played?  It is not like it is being copied or something. Even if it was, it is a digital file and will simply not experience degradation, no matter how many generations of copies.  So something is happening for sure. If it is listener familiarity, then waiting 90-180 seconds before playing it the second time should “eliminate the differences” - or perhaps as many as 300 seconds will need to elapse. If there is a real physical change in the equipment, then the equipment should be left playing during the wait period, perhaps with the volume muted. 

 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

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...