Jump to content
IGNORED

Misleading Measurements


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, SoundAndMotion said:


- The other was you. You know why, and the reason you were banned was *not* an unwillingness to toe the pro-measurement line. People here have been banned for the same reason you were banned there.

 

you did your homework very well....  I didn't want to have to spell it out for you 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Examples please. 

I'm not going to start an open fight with you. I'll PM you a couple examples, and you are free to post them. As you know, or can check, I've praised your moderation (but included some bafflement). Also, read my disclaimer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SoundAndMotion said:

I'm not going to start an open fight with you. I'll PM you a couple examples, and you are free to post them. As you know, or can check, I've praised your moderation (but included some bafflement). Also, read my disclaimer.

Nobody is banned from here quickly without egregious rules violations. 

Founder of Audiophile Style

Announcing The Audiophile Style Podcast

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2020 at 8:11 AM, pkane2001 said:

 

Totally disagree. Since it allows you to construct any non-linearity, it is a tool to simulate whatever you like. 

 

Look, you've obviously not looked or used it or tried to understand what it does, and yet you keep arguing against it. You're arguing in bad faith and there's no reason for it.

 

 

I can't wait for his version of your application with all the corrections and fixes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2020 at 12:06 AM, fas42 said:

 

Try going to YouTube, and type in "million dollar audio system" in its search - you'll find such are in plentiful supply; I saw one reference to $6,000,000 - not much gold around them, 😉.

 

LOL - listening on youtube is like listening to an AM radio presentation of a rock concert.

Current:  JRiver 26 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an AMD A10-5700 with 8 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Amplification - Audio Research SP-16 > Pioneer M-22 - Bow Technologies Wazoo Integrated (great amp - silly name)

Speakers: Wharfedale Linton Heritage - KEF LS50 - Revel M126Be - others......

Cables: Tara Labs RCS Reference speaker cables and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, botrytis said:

 

LOL - listening on youtube is like listening to an AM radio presentation of a rock concert.

 It needn't be that way if you either pay for better audio or have suitable Video S/W where you can demultiplex the hidden A and V streams after downloading the videos. The hidden video is typically 75,000kb/s (max.)  H264, and the hidden Audio is typically 529kb/s .aac which is VERY close to CD uality

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 It needn't be that way if you either pay for better audio or have suitable Video S/W where you can demultiplex the hidden A and V streams after downloading the videos. The hidden video is typically 70,000kb/s (max.)  H264, and the hidden Audio is typically 529kb/s .aac which is VERY close to CD quality

 

What about the mic they used to record it? You know the SINGLE Monaural point source? Also the extra AD-DA now introduced.

 

Is all that very close to CD quality?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 It needn't be that way if you either pay for better audio or have suitable Video S/W where you can demultiplex the hidden A and V streams after downloading the videos. The hidden video is typically 70,000kb/s (max.)  H264, and the hidden Audio is typically 529kb/s .aac which is VERY close to CD quality

 

How many actually know about it and how many just listen to standard lossy youtube fair?

 

Just saying....

Current:  JRiver 26 on Win 10 PC (AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with 32 GB RAM) or Daphile on an AMD A10-5700 with 8 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Amplification - Audio Research SP-16 > Pioneer M-22 - Bow Technologies Wazoo Integrated (great amp - silly name)

Speakers: Wharfedale Linton Heritage - KEF LS50 - Revel M126Be - others......

Cables: Tara Labs RCS Reference speaker cables and DiMarzio Interconnects

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

How many actually know about it and how many just listen to standard lossy youtube fair?

 

Just saying....

Very few other than some A.S. members (and readers) 😉know that with reasonable material to start with , that it is possible to even create better looking AND better sounding videos if you have the patience, and really would like to save that particular performance.

 (The attached was from Miley Cyrus-Malibu)

Miley Cyrus-Malibu.jpg

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Very few other than some A.S. members (and readers) 😉know that with reasonable material to start with you that it is possible to even create better looking AND better sounding videos if you have the patience, and really would like to save that particular performance.

 (The attached was from Miley Cyrus-Malibu)

Miley Cyrus-Malibu.jpg

 

Sandy, they are talking about evaluation of high end systems by hot mic'ing them and then putting them on YT with lossy compression.

 

I used Video LAN player to extract audio all the time off of YT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, plissken said:

Sandy, they are talking about evaluation of high end systems by hot mic'ing them and then putting them on YT with lossy compression.

 

 Let's not get back into fas42 and a member from Malaysia's territory  .😜

 I was only replying to the comment by Botrytis.

  

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

He was pointing out that you can't evaluate high end systems by mic'ing them and uploading it to YT.

According to the 2 that  I mentioned above , you can, just as some A.S.R members probably do too 😜.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites

People can't wrap their heads around the fact that if a YT clip of a high end system playing doesn't sound good, then it's not the fault of YT. Being there in person listening the system that was recorded, the faults that are so obvious in the video are still there; but are usually "swept under the rug" because other aspects of the sound of the playback, live, are more 'impressive' - human hearing doing its usual compensating thing. On a video clip, there is nowhere for the problems to hide, 😉.

Frank

 

http://artofaudioconjuring.blogspot.com/

 

 

Over and out.

.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, plissken said:


Coming from you I'm not surprised.

  Why ?

 I have disagreed with both Frank and S.T. on this very subject on numerous occasions previously .

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this one of those "the truth lies in the middle" issues? 

 

For me, I think I can tell something from You Tube videos.  Indeed, I have been lucky enough to visit shows, then later find You Tube videos  of the kit I actually listened to at the show.  Do you get some sense of the performance of the system?  A little I think, yes.

 

On the other hand, this has to be limited in scope.  Consider, you might hear something at a show and be impressed by maybe the level of microdetails, or how realistic voices sound, or the dynamics, or the impressive impact of the bass, and so on.  Personally I cannot fathom how you can truly know how these aspects sound in "real life" from a You Tube video, unless the microphone, the recording system and your own system at home for the listening were all superior to the system in question.

 

Take one example - visceral bass impact.  If whatever you listen to the You Tube clip on is not capable of visceral bass impact, how can you tell from the clip exactly what this was like for real.

 

So yes, I think you can pick up something for these You Tube clips, but not everything, the whole process in necessarily limited.

 

Furthermore, you can never be 100% sure what you are actually listening too....

 

I posted this a while ago, this is a Cyrus demo at the Bristol HiFi show in the UK.  Running through about 2min 30s into the video, the music plays without interruption, but the seated visitors at the show mysteriously change into different people.....   So clearly the sound and the video were not made at the same time.  (unless visitors were being beamed in and out of their seats using Star Trek technology, although this technology has not made it to Bristol yet, as far as I am aware)

 

 

Windows 10 PC, Roon, HQPlayer, SOtM sMS-200Ultra, tX-USBultra, Paul Hynes SR4 (x2), Mutec REF10, Mutec MC3+USB, Devialet 1000Pro, KEF Blade.  Plus Pro-Ject Signature 12 TT for playing my 'legacy' vinyl collection.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have missed earlier posts here and therefore just confining to the last two posts where reference made to me. 
 

For YouTube video or even high resolution audio samples ( which is usually the case before it is compressed by YT), it will only be useful for system evaluation as heard in situ if it is recorded with binaural mics and played back using headphones. 
 

Binaural recordings capture the sound field. That is the actual sound waves arriving at your ears. You are not only judging the speakers but also the room acoustics. you are judging the phantom image that is created by the stereo playback which depends on how you place them. 

 

Will these audio samples be the mirror image of actual sound?  No! Unless you think your hi Rez audiophile recordings are the exact sound of the actual event. 
 

There will be differences and compromise. The mic quality, pinna difference and the playback method will affect the SQ but you should still able to distinguish the better ones. This is only true if you capture the sound field using binaural mics. 
 

YouTube recordings of system playback using videomic or smartphone mics are misleading. This is so true with today’s modern smartphones that come with noise and echo cancellation where the algorithm’s main job is to make the audio better. The point of making these video is to convey the actual sound as heard by the listener at the sweet spot. The only way to do this is to capture the sound field using binaural mics. 
 

Here is a video using binaural mics comparing 1) Dynaudio Saphire
2) Vandersteen 2CE
3) Magnepan 1.7i
4) JTR Noesis 210RT, speakers.

 

 and this is the sound of Sound Lab speakers ( hi Rez). For Apple to Apple comparison you can compressed it as much you like to match the YouTube SQ. 

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Avexw_l7DM5sgsAbtxb6ZjW4JhuwRA

 

ST

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, STC said:

For YouTube video or even high resolution audio samples ( which is usually the case before it is compressed by YT), it will only be useful for system evaluation as heard in situ if it is recorded with binaural mics and played back using headphones. 
 

 All performance comparisons in this area on YouTube are a waste of time due to YouTube's <128kB/s .aac audio and require a vivid imagination to obtain any meaningful information from them, especially in the HF area and impact of drums etc. which also need wide bandwidth to capture the fast rise and fall times. Add to that typical affordable Binaural microphones which are unable to do high quality system performance justice. 

However, if you are able to listen to the normally inaccessible YouTube 529kB/s .aac stream, ( PID 0x0002) you may get a rough idea ONLY.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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...