Can System Noise be saved to HDDs, SDs, etc. in digital audio files?

[sandyk]

9 hours ago, jabbr said:

may not remember correctly so correct me, but I believe that both Barry D and Cookie M do believe that CDs, copies of CDs can sound different from the master, but that when properly ripped to HD that these differences disappear. 

 Jon

 Barry no longer believes that when the CD is ripped to the HDD that these differences completely disappear.

 Both Barry and his wife still heard repeatable differences with a comparison CD that I sent him  after he ripped it to HDD for seamless switching between both sets of tracks using his studio gear. He sent me an email with his findings which I still have saved .

However, if Barry had directly played them as I intended the differences would have been much greater.

Alex

[tmtomh]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

I think a thread on "likely mechanism(s) responsible for audible differences at the point of D-to-A conversion" would be very worthwhile, and encourage someone to start it.

 

I appreciate that some people want to believe certain things, half.  I do not belong to that religion and am interested in finding out what effects noise can have on SQ in a digital system.  There are procedures for finding out how reality works, and even if they require a lot of effort in this area, some mechanisms by which noise can affect SQ can be characterized, narrowing the list of possibilities for the consumer.

 

I agree with this, and it's why I have particular vitriol for the "noise can somehow be captured/saved in digital audio files even if the bits are identical to clean file" argument: Noise is indeed a major issue in audio reproduction systems, and there are so many noise-related issues worthy of investigating, that it's an infuriating distraction to have oxygen taken up by this manifestly bogus claim of secrete noise hiding in the music files in a way that is not reflected in the data.

[sandyk]

8 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

To be clear you are not doing DBTs. At best single blinded.

 The original series of 6 DBTs that were performed were done to the required standards. Recent reports that I have mentioned were done without knowing which files were which.

[sandyk]

7 hours ago, mansr said:

We don't know his name, so we can't look up anything he might have published,

 

That's typical from you !!!

 

I DO KNOW HIS NAME, AND I HAVE SEEN REFERENCES TO SOME OF HIS PATENTS IN THIS AREA. 

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

The original series of 6 DBTs that were performed were done to the required standards.

Do you have a detailed description of the setup and a video recording if the test session?

[mansr]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

That's typical from you !!!

 

I DO KNOW HIS NAME, AND I HAVE SEEN REFERENCES TO SOME OF HIS PATENTS IN THIS AREA. 

Means nothing to me.

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

Do you have a detailed description of the setup and a video recording if the test session?

 

 Even if there were you would still refuse to accept the results.

[kumakuma]

I strongly believe that the rules of hearsay evidence should apply to this thread.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

Means nothing to me.

 

 Just as the name Mansr means nothing to the vast majority of members of this forum

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Even if there were you would still refuse to accept the results.

It's quite possible I still wouldn't be convinced, but without those I have no reason to even consider the possibility.

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Just as the name Mansr means nothing to the vast majority of members of this forum

So what? I'm not claiming to be a top authority on anything.

[sandyk]

Just now, mansr said:

It's quite possible I still wouldn't be convinced, but without those I have no reason to even consider the possibility.

 

 Just as you refused to be convinced by Mani, who would undoubtedly have been able to reproduce the 9 out 10 correct again if the session had been longer.

[mansr]

[tmtomh]

11 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Just as the name Mansr means nothing to the vast majority of members of this forum

 

Not true, but even if it were, you are way too focused on names and status.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[kumakuma]

11 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Just as you refused to be convinced by Mani

 

 

You keep saying this like it's a bad thing...

 

What Is the Difference Between Skepticism and Denial?

People sometimes confuse skepticism with denial. Skepticism allows scientists to reach logical conclusions supported by evidence that has been examined and confirmed by others in the same field, even when that evidence does not confirm absolute certainty. By contrast, denial is the act of clinging to an idea or belief despite the presence of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 

In order to remain objective, scientists must remain skeptical. In order for scientific knowledge to be advanced, that knowledge must be open to revision. Science works to determine the statistical probability (mathematical likelihood) of a claim's accuracy, not its certainty. Similarly, in a court of law, juries are asked to accept a level of proof that is beyond a reasonable doubt — not absolute certainty — when deciding to convict a defendant.

 

http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/introduction/scientific-inquiry/why-must-scientists-be-skeptics.php

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, mansr said:

So what? I'm not claiming to be a top authority on anything.

 Neither is al.fe

 Others , including myself , who know his credentials are doing this, NOT him !!!

[tmtomh]

Just now, sandyk said:

 Neither is al.fe

 Others , including myself , who know his credentials are doing this, NOT him !!!

 

Once again, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

 

Not true, but even if it were, you are way too focused on names and status.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

Unlike some, I don't keep referring people to textbooks by Henry Ott etc.

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, tmtomh said:

 

Once again, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

 More Ad Hominem and Ad Nauseum !

[kumakuma]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

 More Ad Hominem and Ad Nauseum !

 

I thought you were allergic to Latin! 👺

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I thought you were allergic to Latin! 👺

That's why he had to misspell it.

[sandyk]

8 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

just want to make it clear, as I think was the OP question and @sandyk's persistent claims are that digital copies can somehow embed and reproduce noise from previous digital file copy operations.

 

I have also said that you can REGENERATE the files to very close to that of the original.

 I use an Uptone USB Regen powered by a very low noise battery derived PSU to do this.

[mansr]

13 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Neither is al.fe

 Others , including myself , who know his credentials are doing this, NOT him !!!

Why should I trust you to pick authorities?

[jabbr]

49 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 The original series of 6 DBTs that were performed were done to the required standards. Recent reports that I have mentioned were done without knowing which files were which.

That’s single blinded.

[mansr]

12 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Unlike some, I don't keep referring people to textbooks by Henry Ott etc.

Henry Ott's books are not trusted because of who wrote them but because his methods have been shown to work.