Hi-Res - Does it matter? Blind Test by Mark Waldrep

[marce]

7 hours ago, sandyk said:

Yet more flogging of a dead horse by those who wish to take away the pleasure that others get from 24/192 recordings from Barry Diament, and the recent DSD releases from Cookie Marenco and others .

It's bad enough having crappy MQA dumped on us  without concerted efforts to try and dumb down what we already have available from HD Tracks etc. by way of biased Uni results.

 If those with above average gear, and not having closed minds on this subject wish for more immediate results, then try these examples provided by FrederickV several months back, despite FrederickV insisting that most participants previously failed the test , I had NO problem originally deciding which file was which, and which is the original high res version, and posted the differences that I heard at the time.

Even a few minutes ago when I checked to see if they are still available, I had no problems readily hearing the differences within several seconds.. 

 I feel sorry for those who are unable to appreciate recent genuine high resolution material, and I am 80 years old with industrial type  hearing damage. 

However, I use Class A , NOT Class D amplification. .

 

Do not cheat by looking at the files first !!!

http://klinktbeter.be/hushhush/x.wav

http://klinktbeter.be/hushhush/y.wav

Your posts are a prime example of posts from someone with a closed mind, they all follow the same pattern, ridicule any science or objective testing and throw in a quick advert for "insert name here" or "insert thread name here"...

Why not try out the test instead of just jumping in and dissing it. A recent discussion was similarly derailed when some science based facts were introduced.  It is trolling behaviour and one of the main reasons I can't be bothered to post here anymore...

[marce]

8 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 Why not also get rid of 4K Video , despite it's clear advantages over 1920 x 1080 for many people ?

 

That's just adding to the circle of confusion...

[marce]

12 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Most Audiophiles don't give a damn about Academic reports like this .They listen to music for enjoyment.

Yes, I did find it and have a quick look at it.

 Try using your OWN ears and report what YOU hear for a change, instead of quoting or linking to boring Academic reports and textbooks . 

Science bashing again...

[marce]

2 hours ago, bobbmd said:

@marce @sandyk don't y'all think what i said compared to what  @sandyk said in much gentler tone/kinder tone / can't we be more civil even if we don't agree AND it is still all subjective and we are all entitled to our opinions--tho i was a bit sarcastic!

Don't get it mate, one sentence regarding the regular science bashing, sorry mate but up to Chris or the OT to chastise me.

 

[marce]

12 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

!. I no longer have the exact same files that were evaluated in the 6 DBT sessions several years ago.

2. More recent examples have been checked by al.fe's parent Asian company and a 50 page report prepared.

( In case you don't already know, al.fe designed my internal LG GGW H20L Blu Ray writer and has several patents in the Optical storage area.)  They found no differences in the Digital realm, just like Mansr found none in the samples used in the sessions both he and Mani participated in. The files would need to be checked in the Analogue realm at the output of a DAC.

 I have far better comparison files available  these days, where you still will not find any differences using current Digital techniques.

 They are Music Video files where you can both see and hear differences at the same time, if you use a high quality Monitor and play them through a revealing audio system.

One member here viewed a pair of them side by side on his 4K monitor and reported this :

"Wow Alex.  I looked at the first two links...big quality difference in the video.
How are they different?  Or, what did you change when recording them?" 

This couldn't be two identical files are different, could it...

As the files are identical if you sent them me and I renamed them how would you tell which is which... Want to try it.

[marce]

It was a serious question and would be a valid test.

As to doing something, present the same belief with no backing evidence, you could have got a degree in electronics in less time and solved all our audio issues.

As for the joke advert from Hi-Fi Choice, April 2009, probably the first...

Any more humorous articles to back you up or maybe a bit of name dropping... Martin hasn't appeared for a while!

[marce]

48 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Anything that challenges your firmly entrenched beliefs is a joke to you. 

 

Pathetic reply, we all have to abide by the same laws of physics, you call on them when they support your viewpoint and call them textbook learning, entrenched beliefs etc. when there is no support for your viewpoint.

I am open to new evidence, unlike you, despite thousands of EE's and other technical people disagreeing with your viewpoint on ripped files you still keep harping on about it, yet present no evidence or and theories about how it can happen.

I've learned and changed my views over the years...

Why not start your own thread instead of bringing it up on every thread you can, endlessly.

[marce]

8 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

it may not be the impurities but the grain size for salts

 

mea culpa, I have 3 different kinds of salt + regular salt for cooking....

I concur, I have different grain sizes, for a salt and pepper steak or chicken I use large grains and larger lumps of pepper, you get a stronger hit of each as you encounter a piece, whereas finely ground pepper and salt gives you an overall salty/peppery taste. Depends on the dish and the taste experience you want.

A good example of expectation bias, was people being given cheese and onion in a salt and vinegar packet, they all got the flavour wrong!

[marce]

21 hours ago, mansr said:

Which brand? If it was the boring Walkers, I'm not surprised. There's hardly any correlation between the flavour name and the actual ingredients.

Can't remember, probably....

[marce]

21 hours ago, Rexp said:

So you're an expert in the taste of salt? I mean in comparison to the average Joe who could care less? 

Why don't you ever post anything constructive instead of having a sad little dig at someone... TROLL.

DID I SAY I WAS AN EXPERT IN SALT... NO

All I did was post a response to Ralf's post, of some experience I have learned from watching the numerous cookery programs I watch and experiences from experimenting with cooking, that I like doing.

[marce]

8 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

it would be a REALLY interesting exercise to do a well controlled experiment using noise injection

 

- not hard

 

but would not satisfy the noise-crazies of course

Say like EMC testing!😀

[marce]

Just for you SandyK, you seem to be a bit confused so here is something to help you understand what EMC testing is....

https://emcfastpass.com/emc-testing-beginners-guide/

 

Maybe you should start writing angry letters to your local newspaper.... It will soak up some of your spare time.

[marce]

9 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

High Resolution LPCM does not stop at 24/96 as Mark Waldrep's LPCM recordings do.

Some like myself,find for example, that Barry Diament's recordings in 24/192, with genuine musical content to >55kHz (!)

sound a little better than the same in 24/96. There are also some recordings available as high as 384kHz.

I note also that Mark Waldrep is now recording in DSD as well.

Why?

[marce]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

#555 by Archimago appears to give some of the answers, but raises more questions. Moreover, it is often possible to train others to hear the same differences.

 

I am on about content to 55kHz, wot is the point any modulation of sound within the human hearing range is already done.

I wonder how many real golden eareed people there are out there... I do remember reading a paper many years ago and the number was not huge. As for us older ones 14kHz is probably all we can hope for.

[marce]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

You should already be aware that I mainly use headphones with a quoted response to 40kHz as I have stated it already on several occasions. In addition my HA has a -3dB response at 1.5mHz

.Quite a few members, including Jud, IIRC, have speakers that go close to that as well.

 

 

But not ears!

[marce]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

 So according to you, Hi Res and DSD are a complete waste of time, and 16/44.1 is as good as it gets.

 You are probably a Climate Change Denier too ? 

Please keep the conversation focused, did I mention high res, no. I am referring to content above 20kHz. That we cannot hear and is pointless on a recording.

[marce]

13 hours ago, sandyk said:

You are probably a Climate Change Denier too ? 

Yes I blame it all on Earth's Axial precession and those bloody scientist with their measurements and physics.

Statistically you use the D button more than the rest of the forum put together, I would be worried about RSI😊.

Sorry I forgot how old we all are, content above 14kHz is stretching it for us old people...

[marce]

28 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 

 

BTW,  Archimago has also reported that people with hearing damage are often able to hear things that others are unable to hear .

 

Yes I hear voices in my head...

They tend to pick up on different things , looked into it quite a lot over the years as my Son has a neurotical deafness problem with big dips at 6kHz and 8kHz (cant find his curves as I am at work), but watched him go through speech therapy from the age of 3 to 13 to overcome the problem. Try playback with these frequencies (or other heavily attenuated, its interesting what you pick up on, bit like Bell telephone transmissions all being harmonics of the human voice).

Will try the files tonight when I find my headphones.

[marce]

11 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

Not directed at me. However, my speakers are Infinity Reference Standard 7 Kappa, which have a frequency response of 37Hz - 45kHz +/- 3dB, they use EMIT tweeters.

 

 

I don't believe that anyone has ever claimed that ultrasonic frequencies are heard by anyones ears but are experienced in other ways.

 

I think Chandos Records explanation is perhaps the closest to the truth:

 

 

 

Mans see the above quote from Chandos Records, I have never read a claim that humans can hear much above 20kHz. Teen age girls have been measured to as high as 23kHz, most adults can't hear above 15kHz and older adults it's closer to 12kHz or lower. Ultrasonic overtones may be important to how realistic the fundamental tones in the audible range sound.

Any change to the frequencies we hear would happen before the recording.