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

[The Computer Audiophile]

ATTENTION: People reporting posts and threaten to leave because of @sandyk, please use the ignore user feature. This way you never have to read his crazy posts and outrage again. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

17 minutes ago, sandyk said:

In my case I use headphones that have an extended frequency response .

Given you suffer from major hearing loss, by your own admission, why use products or listen to music with extended frequencies? Is it all about filtering?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

Chris

I may no longer be able to hear very high frequencies, but I am able to notice the difference with their absence for whatever reason .

 Yes, the relaxed filtering of high res material is undoubtedly part of the reason, but then  I shouldn't be able to notice anything in that area either according to current theory.

 In the case of these files that FrederickV posted in A.S. originally, and directly challenged me, I hear a lot of distortion in the converted version right from the start ,as well as it sounding a little softer . perhaps due to the lack of these distortion products.

 It also sounds more musical and involving to me

If my hearing abilities are as bad as you keep insisting, why would both John Dyson and Barry Diament take any notice of what I report back to them ?

 I am still currently assisting John with  his Dolby A correction project, and you may have noticed that John has defended my hearing capabilities on a couple of occasions in your forum recently.

 

Alex

 

I only know what you tell us about your hearing. 
 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

note also that Kumakuma doesn't appear to have enough confidence in his own

Alex - This is a warning. Stop the personal attacks. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

So  it's OK. for both Kumakuma and Ralf11 to continually snipe at me including telling me to cut back on the medication and worse ?

It isn't OK, but I never saw any posts from them saying that. Nobody reported the posts. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

34 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

You're really giving Alex the short end of the stick here. The post you called him out on is pretty tame compared to the ones aimed at him including Ralf11 telling him to STFU. I think you might have deleted that one if I remember correctly but I've noticed that you delete posts of some members without comment but you seem to feel it necessary to call out Alex in public.

Sandy is the only member here to receive multiple behind the scenes warnings because of his belligerence and rage at others. I don’t always call him out. 
 

Both sides of this argument are claiming outrage in the reported posts. Both are claiming the other guys should be banned by now. 
 

Can’t people just use the tools provided, such as ignore user or topic? Must people get outraged so easily? 
 

Some comments are easy to just remove. There is only so much time in the day. I try to call out the frequent offenders of violating the personal attack prohibition. Sure I miss some, but not on purpose. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

It's interesting to me that sometimes the argument is "I don't believe you hear that" and sometimes it's "I don't believe you don't hear that"

 

I'd just like to point out the operative word in both cases is "believe".  😎

Interesting. 
 

When I talked to Archimago at Axpona he mentioned the possibility that people with certain types of hearing damage may be prone to hearing high resolution files. This was only based on his very very very limited sample, but it’s kind of interesting. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

Part of the problem here is due to provocation

No. Be an adult, take personal responsibility, and stop blaming your behavior on others. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

35 minutes ago, Rexp said:

How ironic, I guess Alex upset your fragile ego at some point. 

Is that a personal attack?

 

i have no clue what you mean though. Everyone here can’t blame their belligerent behavior on others. The “he made me do it” excuse is for 2nd grade. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Yeah, this was RMAF in September when we spoke, @The Computer Audiophile...

 

Based on my online bind tests over the years with MP3 vs. lossless and MQA vs. Hi-Res Lossless particularly, I reached out to some of my "golden ears" folks who were able to consistently hear differences. What I noticed was that there was a distinct group of folks who seemed to hear the difference probably because they had abnormal hearing. For example, one fellow admitted that he had hearing damage from previous injury so he's missing certain frequencies and so could tell the difference between what would normally be very similar sounding material to most of us. Another fellow found that a certain signal consistently made his tinnitus worse so could differentiate them (this could have been MQA 🙂.

 

This discussion happened with Mark Waldrep at his booth and I encouraged Mark to follow-up on this. Maybe he can specifically followup with the folks in his blind test who perform exceptionally well and see if there is a similar finding...

 

 

Yup. Probably this kind of phenomenon happening in some of the folks I talked to as well. Of course, being long distance blind tests, I had no way to examine what kind of hearing anomalies these individuals had.

 

What this has taught me is that even if someone claims to be a "golden ear" audiophile and in fact can differentiate clearly between MP3 vs. lossless, or hi-res, it's important NOT to feel envious or think that one can or should aspire to this... It might in fact be the complete opposite and you really do not want that guy's hearing ability! 😉

Thanks for the correction. RMAF of course :~)

 

Very interesting topic.

 

Note to self, stop neurotic audiophiles form purposely damaging hearing in order to pass blind high resolution test.