Rexp Posted June 4, 2021 Share Posted June 4, 2021 https://www.dropbox.com/s/mnmd47b4fekosmo/Melle - Running out of Time1.wav?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/0v4uctdwxaxbdyy/Melle - Running out of Time2.wav?dl=0 Link to comment
danadam Posted June 4, 2021 Share Posted June 4, 2021 Sound the same to me. I'd say the second one is the first one that was peak normalized to 0 dBFS. So it is about 0.0004432 dB louder 🙂 The diff between the first one and the second one has: Overall Left Right Pk lev dB -85.82 -85.82 -86.20 RMS lev dB -102.29 -101.65 -103.03 RMS Pk dB -92.78 -92.78 -94.26 RMS Tr dB -129.57 -129.53 -129.57 Window s 0.050 The diff between the normalized version of the first one and the original second one has: Overall Left Right Pk lev dB -114.39 -114.39 -114.95 RMS lev dB -129.13 -129.11 -129.15 RMS Pk dB -128.16 -128.16 -128.29 RMS Tr dB -129.77 -129.69 -129.77 Window s 0.050 Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 5, 2021 Author Share Posted June 5, 2021 12 hours ago, danadam said: Sound the same to me. I'd say the second one is the first one that was peak normalized to 0 dBFS. So it is about 0.0004432 dB louder 🙂 The diff between the first one and the second one has: Overall Left Right Pk lev dB -85.82 -85.82 -86.20 RMS lev dB -102.29 -101.65 -103.03 RMS Pk dB -92.78 -92.78 -94.26 RMS Tr dB -129.57 -129.53 -129.57 Window s 0.050 The diff between the normalized version of the first one and the original second one has: Overall Left Right Pk lev dB -114.39 -114.39 -114.95 RMS lev dB -129.13 -129.11 -129.15 RMS Pk dB -128.16 -128.16 -128.29 RMS Tr dB -129.77 -129.69 -129.77 Window s 0.050 Thanks for the feedback! I'll take that meaning the difference in measurements is so small it won't affect the sound. Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 5, 2021 Author Share Posted June 5, 2021 @pkane2001 @March Audio any thoughts? Anyone else care to offer an opinion? Link to comment
fas42 Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 Nothing here, to be heard ... I loaded both into Audacity, subtracted one from the other, there was a difference waveform that was about 85dB down; I amplified that difference file by 85dB - which then looked the same as one of the original files. Soloing that original, then the new, amplified by 85dB difference, waveform, and bouncing between them, they sounded the same ... Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 5, 2021 Author Share Posted June 5, 2021 2 minutes ago, fas42 said: Nothing here, to be heard ... I loaded both into Audacity, subtracted one from the other, there was a difference waveform that was about 85dB down; I amplified that difference file by 85dB - which then looked the same as one of the original files. Soloing that original, then the new, amplified by 85dB difference, waveform, and bouncing between them, they sounded the same ... ? The difference in db has been measured at 0.0004432 dB, see above Link to comment
fas42 Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 23 minutes ago, Rexp said: ? The difference in db has been measured at 0.0004432 dB, see above The numbers I quoted were approximate - what matters is that there was a difference, which could be amplified to the same level as the original; which then sounded the same as the original. Which says that the difference between them is only of level, and nothing else - at least as far as being meaningful to non hypercritical listening. Link to comment
March Audio Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Rexp said: @pkane2001 @March Audio any thoughts? Anyone else care to offer an opinion? I'm out and about at the moment but will take a look later today. Curious to find out the reason for the question, I'm sure all will be revealed in due course. 😀 Rexp 1 Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 5, 2021 Author Share Posted June 5, 2021 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: The numbers I quoted were approximate - what matters is that there was a difference, which could be amplified to the same level as the original; which then sounded the same as the original. Which says that the difference between them is only of level, and nothing else - at least as far as being meaningful to non hypercritical listening. Ok thanks Link to comment
March Audio Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 @Rexp I loaded both files into Adobe Audition. I copied file1 and mix pasted it into file2 whilst also inverting the signal. The result was a perfect cancellation. There is no reason to expect the files to sound different based on their content, but I will have a listen. Link to comment
March Audio Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 Just listened and they sound the same here. So whats the check all about? :) Link to comment
danadam Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 5 hours ago, Rexp said: ? The difference in db has been measured at 0.0004432 dB, see above The difference between two levels in dB is not the same as the level of their their difference in dB. For example, if 0 dBFS is 1.0, then 1 dB less, -1 dBFS, is 0.891. The difference, 1.0 - 0.891, is 0.109, which in dB is -19.25 dBFS. So both are true, the difference between the levels of those examples is 0.0004432 dB and the level of their null (peak level to be precise) is -85.82 dBFS. Link to comment
danadam Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 2 hours ago, March Audio said: I loaded both files into Adobe Audition. I copied file1 and mix pasted it into file2 whilst also inverting the signal. The result was a perfect cancellation. Interesting. That's not what happens for me (i.e. I don't get perfect cancellation) when using SoX or Audacity. Also statistics in ffmpeg show different levels between the two: ]$ ffmpeg -hide_banner -i "Melle - Running out of Time1.wav" -af astats -f null /dev/null ... [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x559ba517e000] Overall [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x559ba517e000] Peak level dB: -0.000443 [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x559ba517e000] RMS level dB: -16.400792 ]$ ffmpeg -hide_banner -i "Melle - Running out of Time2.wav" -af astats -f null /dev/null ... [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x5570e1947640] Overall [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x5570e1947640] Peak level dB: 0.000000 [Parsed_astats_0 @ 0x5570e1947640] RMS level dB: -16.400351 Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 5, 2021 Author Share Posted June 5, 2021 3 hours ago, March Audio said: Just listened and they sound the same here. So whats the check all about? :) I prefer one over the other, wanted to see if others agree. Link to comment
fas42 Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 The "louder" one, I presume ... 😆 Link to comment
danadam Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 7 hours ago, Rexp said: ? The difference in db has been measured at 0.0004432 dB, see above Also, to be clear, it is not just a simple volume change between the two examples, because otherwise reverting it should get a perfect null and that is not what happens. For example, here's how you can get a similar null. Take the first track, reduce it gain by 19 dB and then normalize to 0 dBFS. The null between 1 and our new track has: Overall Left Right Pk lev dB -85.78 -85.78 -86.11 RMS lev dB -102.19 -101.55 -102.93 RMS Pk dB -92.68 -92.68 -94.16 RMS Tr dB -130.31 -130.30 -130.31 Window s 0.050 Which is very similar to the null between 1 and 2. Link to comment
March Audio Posted June 5, 2021 Share Posted June 5, 2021 I will check the files again tomorrow. I confess I was in a rush. Link to comment
March Audio Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 @Rexp OK, second attempt. I think I may have inadvertently mix copied the same file into itself yesterday. DOH! Track 1 numbers. Track 2 numbers The amplitude levels are all identical so the difference is less than 0.01dB, however you can see the difference in amplitude on the min/max sample values. I nulled as yesterday and it is not a perfect null. The peak levels are around -86dB and more around -106dB average. You can just about see something in the spectrogram. Nothing can be heard if played back at any sensible volume setting. Here is the nulled wav file. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AnQ0c7fb_4zLgmEgY_hxnSq57Lyg?e=X3Qn48 I then amplified the nulled file by 66dB (2000x) here is the amplified file https://1drv.ms/u/s!AnQ0c7fb_4zLgmL2pHPlEfCDMeb2?e=fZeRur When listening to the amplified null file it has some "phaseyness" but is generally quite similar to the originals which implies the differences are primarily (but not entirely) amplitude. I still cant hear any difference when comparing the two tracks. Hope that helps So what is meant to be/reason for the difference in the files? Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 6, 2021 Author Share Posted June 6, 2021 3 hours ago, March Audio said: @Rexp OK, second attempt. I think I may have inadvertently mix copied the same file into itself yesterday. DOH! Track 1 numbers. Track 2 numbers The amplitude levels are all identical so the difference is less than 0.01dB, however you can see the difference in amplitude on the min/max sample values. I nulled as yesterday and it is not a perfect null. The peak levels are around -86dB and more around -106dB average. You can just about see something in the spectrogram. Nothing can be heard if played back at any sensible volume setting. Here is the nulled wav file. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AnQ0c7fb_4zLgmEgY_hxnSq57Lyg?e=X3Qn48 I then amplified the nulled file by 66dB (2000x) here is the amplified file https://1drv.ms/u/s!AnQ0c7fb_4zLgmL2pHPlEfCDMeb2?e=fZeRur When listening to the amplified null file it has some "phaseyness" but is generally quite similar to the originals which implies the differences are primarily (but not entirely) amplitude. I still cant hear any difference when comparing the two tracks. Hope that helps So what is meant to be/reason for the difference in the files? Thanks, was hoping more folks would compare the sound. Will leave it up for a bit longer before the reveal. Link to comment
idiot_savant Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 I reckon one has had dither added possibly Or maybe it’s a very small amount of mixing the 2 channels? your friendly neighbourhood idiot Link to comment
PeterSt Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 4 hours ago, Rexp said: Thanks, was hoping more folks would compare the sound. Will leave it up for a bit longer before the reveal. Listening time is starting in a few minutes here. System needs to warm up a bit (ears too) beers must cool down. I will not be measuring and will only have a subjective opinion (including "don't hear a difference". But give me an hour, or trust that I won't read any posts after mine, now. 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
PeterSt Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 All right (not so) ... you should not do this. And not even sure if you are aware of it @Rexp, but this is so full of "ticks" cause by overloading the digital file, that I could only be distracted by that. So ... (in the 16 bit domain) 32767 + 1 is ? wrong. I played Time2 before Time1 to avoid additional pitfall, but if you ask me Time2 has less of it but more severe (more subsequent of it ?) and Time1 has more of it and could even be more annoying. Now, if I won a price, please let me know. But I'm afraid it was about something else. haha PS: The exercise took exactly 6m50 so no need or lust to listen to more of this. And oh, would thee suggestion that this is from LP to begin with (which I believe firmly is not the case) ... better don't; Too distracting. 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
PeterSt Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 !! Please scratch my observations ! I did not trust the fact that both files exhibited the ticks, and I found it to be a USB (settings) issue on my side. More later. 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
fas42 Posted June 6, 2021 Share Posted June 6, 2021 Since it looks like there is a secret sauce in this, I had another quick look - only thing I saw was that Audacity considered the second, tiny bit louder, version to be clipping at a single point; whereas the first was given a clean bill of health ... on some DACs, this might be audible. Link to comment
Rexp Posted June 7, 2021 Author Share Posted June 7, 2021 10 hours ago, PeterSt said: All right (not so) ... you should not do this. And not even sure if you are aware of it @Rexp, but this is so full of "ticks" cause by overloading the digital file, that I could only be distracted by that. So ... (in the 16 bit domain) 32767 + 1 is ? wrong. I played Time2 before Time1 to avoid additional pitfall, but if you ask me Time2 has less of it but more severe (more subsequent of it ?) and Time1 has more of it and could even be more annoying. Now, if I won a price, please let me know. But I'm afraid it was about something else. haha PS: The exercise took exactly 6m50 so no need or lust to listen to more of this. And oh, would thee suggestion that this is from LP to begin with (which I believe firmly is not the case) ... better don't; Too distracting. No LP's were harmed in the making of this recording. PeterSt 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now