Jump to content
IGNORED

Do you hear what I hear (bit perfect files sounding different)?


Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

the claim here is that two bit identical files played back under identical conditions sound different. Same playback software, same settings.

 

- same buffer sizes.

 

1 hour ago, idiot_savant said:

OK, so I said I wasn't going to comment on buffers, but...

 

There are numerous types and implementations of buffers, but to be clear we're talking about the memory kind, not the voltage translation kind, right?

 

1 hour ago, idiot_savant said:

 

Now, you also have the kind of buffers @Summit is talking about, which is typically a PC application feeding "audio buffers" - in this case the sound device is pulling audio from a buffer to play it in "the real world",

 

[... etc. ...]

 

1 hour ago, idiot_savant said:

none of this helps make bit-identical files sound different

 

So this sure does not help the conversation to be clear.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
1 minute ago, idiot_savant said:

@yamamoto2002- the claimant is using an SSD,

 

Is he ?

 

1 minute ago, idiot_savant said:

the player reads the whole file into RAM before starting playback.

 

If you suggest it is played from RAM ... maybe. But you are guessing that. Abd if you are not guessing that, the "claimant" is guessing that (assumed you refer to @manueljenkin here). The author is not claiming that - at least not that I am aware of.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
On 6/1/2021 at 5:29 PM, manueljenkin said:

copies to RAM directly (like playpcmwin) and plays to enjoy the benefits, as long as you don't move or edit the file (moving between different local drives, making a copy and editing would likely nullify the optimization).

 

Playback system is surface book 2016 256gb SSD with gt940m feeding a few usb dacs


your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, idiot_savant said:

@manueljenkin- I’m in no rush, it’s merely you said you’d have something, so I’m waiting patiently

 

@andrewinukm - I’m not disagreeing with a single thing you’re saying. There *are* valid reasons for having a buffer ( eg to deal with the “bursty” nature of network/USB connections ), or to prevent pops and bangs when something upstream changes, but it’s not going to help with “inconsistent” or “poorly transmitted” data - this kind of problem won’t sound slightly worse, it will pop and crackle - what kind of input are you using, out of interest?

 

I’m not here to argue with what people hear, I’m here to discuss why these beliefs have become so widespread. I’m a big believer that if you hear something but can’t measure it, you should look at why you can’t measure it, and fix that

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

 

 

 

I wasn't directing at you, it was mainly to prevent some others who may have a hard opinion to jump in and accidentally start a thread war. 😅 

 

I mainly use USB (laptop as my digital source) & optical (gaming). I've tried SPDIF RCA with WaveIO converter before. 

 

For the case of my DAC, the buffer is implemented for sound quality reasons by the manufacturer. As a user, I like what this buffer does. Without the buffer, there's no drop outs or anything, just that I observed a slight drop in clarity.

 

Like I said, it's a layman explanation as electronics and digital science are not my specialty. Though this won't stop me from trying things out and hopefully understanding the science behind it. But the onus is not with one consumer to spend personal time and money, simply to satisfy another consumer's demand for better measurement data or proof. Also, there's the consideration that measurement technology or methodology may not be developed yet. Developing a validated test protocol is a huge scientific effort, and I thank you for thinking so highly of me or any random forumer can easily achieve this. But sadly, I can only build simple stuff and listen to it across many setups and many different ears... hopefully to identify a consistent trend. 

 

Also, I wish bit identical files sound the same. I was skeptical of claims by others, so I went and did my own tests. As for the results, let's just say  I'm either hallucinating or I'm enjoying the placebo effects waaaayyy too much than I should. 😜 Can't explain nor measure it, but I certainly have identified some consistent observations. 

 

---

This is more of a public announcement to others:

I applaud ppl like Golden Sound and Manueljenkin for their technical knowledge and willingness to to measure and prove things, even though that's not their responsibilities. 

 

So what if a user claims something? A baby seal didn't die because of that. And the software is FREE. Is there really a need to hang the creator and a user of the software just because someone hears a difference? 😅

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

copies to RAM directly (like playpcmwin) and plays to enjoy the benefits, as long as you don't move or edit the file (moving between different local drives, making a copy and editing would likely nullify the optimization).

 

This will be my last post in this thread for the time being. This seriously is shifting goal posts one time too many for me.

Maybe you can explain why you left our the context ? (see the full quote below).

I like games, but they should not be played with me.

 

 

On 6/1/2021 at 6:29 PM, manueljenkin said:

Since you would have both the unoptimized and optimized files you could easily a/b between the two and compare when playing on the junilabs player. You can use this new file with any music player that copies to RAM directly (like playpcmwin) and plays to enjoy the benefits, as long as you don't move or edit the file (moving between different local drives, making a copy and editing would likely nullify the optimization).

 

 

6 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

Oh, and junilabs player most definitely loads into RAM before playback. 

 

Sure. Another one out of context. This time your own.

 

15 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

If you suggest it is played from RAM ... maybe. But you are guessing that.

 

I hope you see the difference in my suggestion and your stipulation ?

Have fun with the others !

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

If you suggest it is played from RAM ... maybe. But you are guessing that. Abd if you are not guessing that, the "claimant" is guessing that (assumed you refer to @manueljenkin here). The author is not claiming that - at least not that I am aware of.

Is what you said. I quoted from the very first post in the thread, saying he had an SSD, and any player that played from RAM would be improved. 
 

How, exactly is this out of context? 
 

The buffers post is the one out of context ?

 

Ive said before, English is clearly not your first language so if you’re going to be rude, wouldn’t it be worth being sure before spouting off? 

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

Link to comment

@andrewinukm- sorry, perhaps my post wasn’t clear? I’m not asking anyone to do anything but thought experiments?

 

I’m not trying to hang anyone - @manueljenkin hasn’t measured anything, claims to have an EE background and makes preposterous claims. I’ve given him every opportunity to back out, but he keeps digging…

 

like I’ve said numerous times, I’m not disputing what people are subjectively experiencing, but some claims deserve a bit of challenging? The industry is full of snake oil, so if a little bit of critical thinking can reduce that, isn’t that a good thing?

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

Link to comment

Always curious how people thrash around in these discussions, and it seems that basic understanding of what's happening overall is never learnt:

 

1) Audio playback setups, and especially digital sourced variants, are never engineered well enough to keep interference effects at bay

 

2) Human hearing is extremely sensitive to disturbing anomalies in the sound - the less 'organic' the distortion artifacts are, the worse it is ... which is why digital has had a terrible time over the decades, and only recently has been more generally accepted, by fussy listeners

 

3) The "snake oil" exists, because people are willing to try anything, absolutely anything, to make the listening better - and quite often these "bizarre" methods actually do enough to change some part of the operating of the audio chain to be of real benefit to the person who bought it.

 

4) If something works in a certain situation, it works - just get over it ... the big universe out there is full of crazily bizarre stuff, that no-one understands - and the universe doesn't stop working, just because there is no satisfactory explanation, CURRENTLY, of how it all hangs together ...

Link to comment
7 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Is he ?

 

 

If you suggest it is played from RAM ... maybe. But you are guessing that. Abd if you are not guessing that, the "claimant" is guessing that (assumed you refer to @manueljenkin here). The author is not claiming that - at least not that I am aware of.

Yes I'm using SSD and tried with players that buffer the full song to RAM before playback.

 

6 hours ago, idiot_savant said:

@andrewinukm

I’m not trying to hang anyone - @manueljenkin hasn’t measured anything, claims to have an EE background and makes preposterous claims. I’ve given him every opportunity to back out, but he keeps digging.

What a way to skew your narratives. I didn't in this thread invoke anything about my technical qualifications. You were trying for an appeal to authority in another thread by saying you're an EE and something should never work, and I said I'm also an EE and there's nothing in EE that establishes the impossibility of the situation you mentioned.

 

I don't have any reason to back out. I hear changes, and since this area is very intricate, I'm doing other experiments to find the true reasoning. I can give a dozen speculations now, all of which are within bounds of EE but I digress, I want to share something concrete when I can. I underestimated the time required, as there are dependencies that take some while to get fulfilled.

Link to comment

The impact of noise on SQ is hard to measure ... it has no right to be like that!!! Naughty, naughty noise - I would spank you if I could !! Oh, for issues that are easy to see on a meter - when will life get better again ... we can live in hope ... 🤪 😝.

Link to comment

Fascinating...

 

When people "hear" a difference between bit-perfect files. And seem genuine in their claims! Says a lot about expectations and the way we understand how things work.

 

I am curious though. If this "optimize" algorithm is supposedly able to change the sound of an otherwise identical file, how does it determine where best to copy out the disk sectors? How does it know to locate it at an appropriate location on a spinning hard drive that won't make it "sound bad"? Are we sure the file is not saved out to a poor SSD location which might be more "noisy" than another location on the drive? I don't think there's any reason to believe that the software is sophisticated enough to hit the hardware or overcome the OS's file system architecture, right?

 

When we open up the Pandora's Box to beliefs which seem to have no bearing in reality, all kinds of "loose" ideas become possible, even plausible (the kind of ideas snake oil salesmen relish in targeting)! IMO this is undisciplined thinking and while we can all engage in such ideas (who doesn't enjoy a little bit of fiction or escape once awhile?), it really doesn't pay any dividends ultimately.

 

Appreciating audio hardware, and enjoying the music do not require magical thinking folks...

 

 

Archimago's Musings: A "more objective" take for the Rational Audiophile.

Beyond mere fidelity, into immersion and realism.

:nomqa: R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

I am curious though. If this "optimize" algorithm is supposedly able to change the sound of an otherwise identical file, how does it determine where best to copy out the disk sectors? How does it know to locate it at an appropriate location on a spinning hard drive that won't make it "sound bad"? Are we sure the file is not saved out to a poor SSD location which might be more "noisy" than another location on the drive? I don't think there's any reason to believe that the software is sophisticated enough to hit the hardware or overcome the OS's file system architecture, right?

@Archimago - it doesn’t do anything like this - I’ve decompiled it, and starts a thread writing random numbers to the page file, reads the file into memory, sits there for a bit doing it’s random number thing then writes the file back to the disk using fairly standard file IO. 
 

Apparently you should run this process on the player executable as well. 
 

I’ve checked the player code as well, and to make things worse for explaining it, that pretty much does the same thing, and reads the each song into memory completely before playing it back. 
 

As I’ve said before, I can see no plausible reason to think this will do anything apart from reduce the life of the disk with the page file on it, but I am an idiot, and @manueljenkin has been working on an explanation of this for a while now

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Archimago said:

I am curious though. If this "optimize" algorithm is supposedly able to change the sound of an otherwise identical file, how does it determine where best to copy out the disk sectors? How does it know to locate it at an appropriate location on a spinning hard drive that won't make it "sound bad"? Are we sure the file is not saved out to a poor SSD location which might be more "noisy" than another location on the drive? I don't think there's any reason to believe that the software is sophisticated enough to hit the hardware or overcome the OS's file system architecture, right?

You are right that there is more than one aspect when it comes to access noise. This tool doesn't cater to the specific possibilities you mention as those, but it does other things as seen from the code. It approaches the noise reduction from another perspective/angle and you may be able to double down on it if you were to analyse and fix the other issues you mentioned!For example File system architecture is in the hands of the user, and can be tweaked by the user without this tool, so that's a non issue argument.

 

 

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...