Am I Deaf ?????

[Miska]

"Jitter" usually sounds a little softer

 

How jitter sounds depends on type of the jitter.

 

There is at least:

1) random wide band jitter

2) random narrow band jitter

3) non-data related modulation jitter (PSU/hum induced etc)

4) data-correlated jitter

 

All these sound different. The first one has least impact on sound quality while the last one has most.

 

Closest equivalents on analog side, (1) is like thermal noise, (2) is a bit like LP bearing rumble, (3) is like wow and flutter on LP or tape and (4) is remotely like sound-controlled VCO in analog synth.

 

 

[elcorso]

Hey PeterSt I think I'm also deaf !!!

 

When I replaced the spinning HD for an SSD on my MacMini, I didn't get any improvement: I have to lower the volume of my subwoofers, but because this not solved the problem, I have to turn off the subs!

Why? Because deep bass came to my listening position some time after the other musical notes, or, there were bass notes when It should be no one present. First I suspected it was something wrong in the recorded music, but by listening comparison to the same music played by the CD/SACD player, I confirmed this bass was added by the SSD, since it was not when I had the spinning HD!

 

The weird thing is, we are both in very different OS environment, then I asume the OS in the SSD is the culpable one, and not the system by himself.

 

I made some tests:

 

• Playing music from the external HD (by the way, I switched to the Oyen Digital MiniPro, and is incredible the change since my prior Iomega external HD: Thanks Chris Connaker for the recommendation), the same bass problem.

 

• Playing music stored on the internal SSD: Cleaner music, but the same bass problem.

 

• By listening trough my headphones, I don't have this problem, since there is no deep bass from them.

 

Why the bass timing problem? I really don't know. I read somewhere SSD are more noisy (in terms of EMI & RFI) than the spinning one. But I stated in another post I didn't get any improvement when I switched to the SSD.

 

Some friends said: Hey you have and incredible bass now!

 

Now I know my deep bass is not credible anymore...

 

Rayn87, please re-check your setup, because THERE ARE huge (in audiophile terms) differences between computer music players app's.

 

And eggers, your statement on "bitperfect = bitperfect = bitperfect", has being discussed a lot by a long, long time from another post in this forum. I don't remember your participation, but I don't want to discusse that matter anymore, but you can ask Sandyk, he knows better than me, regarding this issue. And I do believe in Bernie Grundman statement, but this is maybe because I'm crazy as my horse in the full Moon phase, even if we are in waxing Moon phase today.

 

I like to ask PeterSt: Please develop an app like XXHE por the Mac. I know your app por PC is great, but, I already know your answer...

 

Happy listening!

 

Roch

 

[James1776]

Sorry, I didn't look there. I have a set of 550's and believe they are sufficient to hear differences so your higher priced blend should be even better.

 

I can hear the difference between iTunes and Pure Music easily. I can hear differences between my transport and my iMac based music through the same DAC as well so I do not know what to say about your problem.

 

Your system is at least as good as mine. I wish I could provide better advice. All I can say is that I think you should be able to hear the differences.

 

 

 

[bleedink]

and the other gentleman on here about the power of suggestion. I too perhaps have not spent as much as others, or don't have a revealing enough system to hear some of the things that other folks on here seem to hear. I've since learned to stop worrying about it and if it sounds good to my ears and makes me relaxed then it is doing what it is supposed to be doing. I now seek out more high resolution music not because it always sounds 'better'. It just tends to lessen the amount of fatigue my ears get when I listen to CD quality or mp3s. I can only get an hour from CD's (or flac, wav, whatever) before my ears are tired. Mp3's generally will tire me out after one song if that. Seriously they universally to a one sound terrible to my ears--maybe not quite that bad--but close. Perhaps 20 minutes with an mp3 and Im done. Now higher resolution recordings, even some not so great ones, tend not to fatigue me in the same way. It isn't even that I can hear the difference (though sometimes it's a pleasant surprise to hear things you have never heard on a recording you've listened to a million times) or reliably tell in a short test. In fact I'd likely fail a double blind hearing test. Id like to think I wouldn't but for short listening it's kinda hard to tell. Now were I to hear 20 or 30 minutes of a sample I would probably be able to tell you because of how my ears feel. It never surprises me people can't readily tell the difference as it takes a little while for at least my ear to resolve what I am hearing. It may even sound 'great' at first, then 'grate' 5 minutes later. Then you realize you have been listening to an mp3 and ya go aaaaah....that makes sense. Again mostly I judge the sound on how much it tires me. If it doesn't tire my ear, and sounds good, thats all I need.

 

[Miska]

I confirmed this bass was added by the SSD, since it was not when I had the spinning HD!

 

I would approach this by fixing the computer until there's no audible differences between SSD and HDD. Since technically there shouldn't be a difference, as long as there is, there's something wrong with the hardware.

 

Same goes for all the other pieces. Repeat until you reach bits are bits situation. Then you know the hardware is proper.

 

Otherwise it's just random wandering in the darkness where everything depends on sheer luck.

 

Just my opinion...

 

 

[dummy]

The question might have been "Am I normal?" as well...

 

I, too, have been questionning my own ears after doing A/B tests between players, formats, connexions, etc. Mostly after being addicted to this site and reading too much stuff and different opinions/options. One can easily get mad in the search for "sound".

 

Then I put Rickie Lee Jones's amazing rendition of "Something Cool" (from her Girl At Her Volcano CD) which might very well be the worst live recording ever, It sounds like a really bad bootleg. But It doesn't matter. She sang It like no one else, the emotions are all there and It gets me everytime. Pure bliss. Yet It does sounds awful.

 

Bottom line, for me, It is about *music*. Yet, I keep reading and whenever there is a new trick, a free one, I try It out, just to see, since I am curious. Most of the time, I can't hear It. Or, I hear a slight difference that is more about being a tad different than positively better.

 

Am I right? Am I wrong? I don't really care that much anymore. If you hear It and thinks It is better, more power to you. I have no problem with that. And I would never say you are wrong just because you can hear It and I don't or the other way around.

 

My hearing might very well be at stake here. It's okay. My ears are my ears after all and nothing I can do about that. And my very humble system is just that, humble.

 

Then again, I often can't hear differences between mp3 and WAV so there is obviously something wrong with me. Again, It's okay.

 

I've never been able to tell apart JRiver from MediaMonkey or Foobar. In the end, I choose JRiver because I like the interface the most and their WASAPI Event Style is the only output that cured all the little glitches I was having here and there with my rDac. It happen that JRiver *seem* to be the player of choice here for the Windows crownd. I didn't choose It for that in the end although I tried It because of that in the first place.

 

I have heard $$$$ systems that, to *me*, didn't sound that much better that my humble system. Yet, everytime I hear a dCS product, within 5 seconds I am thinking "Hot damn!!!". So my hearing do work once in a while I suppose.

 

In the end, to me, It is about the music. But It is just as much about the convenience of this whole computer audio business. I've never listen to as much music as I do now since I've ripped 3/4 of my music collection. Browsing through JRiver and actually seeing the covers art at the tip of my finger changed EVERYTHING to me. I now listen to stuff I completely forgot I had and didn't listened to for years. THAT is the good news to me. Also, that It does sounds just as good/better than a cd player was a big surprise to me.

 

Otherwise It would be easy and I would just come back to vinyl. I mean, to *me* nothing sounds better than a good'ol LP. But the convenience of the LP? No can't do.

 

I had a computer failure the other day and I was out of It for 2 days. I then HAD to listen to cd's. The sound was allright. But to get up and swap cd's everytime... What is this? 2008?!?! I know now I could never go back to cd's. EVER.

 

I do understand kids today with their iPods and mp3's...

 

I will continue reading this great site. I learned a lot and keep learning everyday from It. The tips are often interesting. And I will keep asking questions. I like to learn the how's and why's. In the end though, It's okay If I might be deaf or not normal (ie, not hearing what most hears). I can live with that.

 

Back to Rickie Lee...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[James1776]

It reads like you need a really big change in quality before you can hear a difference. Not sure if that is a blessing or a curse.

 

[sandyk]

Peter and Roch

It sounds very much like SSD's would also benefit from using a low noise, very low impedance PSU ?

The extra low end performance, as well as HF detail improvement when using the USB stick with a low noise , low impedance linear PSU sounds right, both on headphones and via my Class A speaker system. Recently, I uploaded a rip for a musician friend in the U.K. using the linear PSU with the Corsair Voyager GT for storing and playback.My friend had heard the master of "L.P.O.-Mahler-Symphony No.2 Resurrection"and was not satisfied with what he heard from the CD.

Attached is his report.

SandyK

 

"That's the dog's bollocks! Weighty, warm goes extremely loud with no pain. In fact, I'm more aware of the mic hissing. (I heard that on the original)

 

Spacial information is better. more aware of where the instruments are - particularly in the depth of the soundstage. i can almost judge the distance back from the conductor and I can tell that the flute (who sits next to the oboe player) is on the right of the oboist. The spacial clues are very strong.

 

The other interesting thing is the acoustic. The hall is pretty dead acoustically and the recording has captured the weird kind of acoustic that you get in that hall. It's kind of dry.

 

I can hear pages being turned as well. Brass are NOT as strident.

 

Whatever you've done, that's the one. It's bloody good.

 

[sandyk]

Peter and Roch

I have found numerous reports in various forums about SSDs causing annoying noise problems, where the rest of the system is quiet. There are many reports also about whining noises emanating from SSDs as well, most likely from inductors.

It also appears that in many cases, there may not be as much gain in power consumption as originally expected.

I wonder if the demands of the onboard DC to DC converter are being reflected through lower quality PSUs ?

Attached is a link to a block diagram of a typical SSD.

 

SandyK

 

http://www.latticesemi.com/images/img39575.jpg

 

[SteveChicago]

This is a great discussion. FWIW my experience has been:

1. Upgrading amp > big SQ improvement

2. Upgrading DAC > big SQ improvement

3. Upgrading speakers > big SQ improvement

4. Using silver S/PDIF over Toslink > big SQ improvement

 

With system as it now is:

5. iTunes v. Pure Music -- No noticeable difference

6. iTunes v. Decibel -- No noticeable difference

 

But, features on the player software, such as auto sample rate switching, are a benefit over iTunes.

 

7. In all confurations the recording makes a huge difference in SQ

 

[Raym87]

It seems, from my interpretation of what I have read, that the better the hardware components of your system work together or synergise, the less you will notice differences in the software. After all, as already stated, bit perfect = bit perfect = bit perfect.

It's not just my thought, a few recent posters have eluded to this.

 

So my theory (and it is just that) is that if you do hear a difference between software apps, then look elsewhere as there may be an underlying reason why this difference is so apparent. If you dont, you are either deaf or your system is working optimally and you can relax and just listen to the music. Lets just hope it's the latter...lol....

 

[wappinghigh]

Well said..I was starting to think your "deafness" had really opened up a can of worms! Nothing like an optimally working hifi system

 

[SteveChicago]

I forgot to include speaker placement as a significant factor in SQ.

 

 

[elcorso]

Thanks SandyK!

 

I'll try to fix the noise from SPSU in the MacMini, even it's a difficult task being an internal one...

 

I'll try an Isolation Transformer: TrippLite Hospital Grade, even if I don't like the iso tran's, sometimes they brings you more noise than they filter, and/or removes harmonics from music.

 

I know most of the noise in the HiEnd music gear cames from PSU's feeding them. That's why you pay a lot for some units, very good LPSU's (low noise) are expensive to design and construct.

 

By the way, did you notice most of the posts and replies in this forum are regarding sonic diferences between computer music player app's, and some ones state that there is no difference?

 

I'm afraid if everybody feels that there are no sonic differences between app's this forum will die very soon!

 

Thanks again and happy listening!

 

Roch

 

[Miska]

I'm afraid if everybody feels that there are no sonic differences between app's this forum will die very soon!

 

Some apps merely copy the bits from audio files to the audio device.

 

Others apply hefty amounts of processing...

 

Which ones better utilize the possibilities of modern computers?

 

[wgscott]

There are different playback engines in some of the software. So one based exclusively on Apple's core audio may sound different from one based on code that bypasses or replaces a subset of core audio functionality. The same PDF displays differently in Adobe Acrobat Reader than it does in Preview. One uses apples core quartz functionality, and the other installs its own (arguably viral) crap display engine.

 

Having said that, I struggle to hear a difference.

 

[Vadim in Tuapse]

Sorry, Ray, I can not believe that a well-tuned system does not allow to hear the difference between the software players. To me more clear when khollister in a nearby thread "Anybody tried Fidelia ?" compares the sound of players as:

"Something along the lines of ...

Amarra = Conrad Johnson

PureMusic = Audio Research

Decibel / Fidelia = Krehl"

There are lot of reasons that a listener may not hear any differences between the players, including: wrong equipment and software configuration, the entire equipment chain from the first to last component do not match each other, the interconnect cables are not chosen carefully, the room environment may not be up to the task (bare walls, tile or hardwood floors and exposed doors, windows) and so on. There is an interesting site devoted to all this stuff http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/index.html.

There was a case in my practice when I mixed up the power polarity of of the headphone amp M^3, connecting the plug in the wall socket. The sound has become flat, unpleasant, monotonous with an amorphous bass and sharp highs. It also may be a possible cause. Very important to check the power polarity of all components of the system. There is a link of HowTo http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/acpolarity.html

Or easie to use the Van Den Hul polarity checker for this purpose http://www.vandenhul.com/p_IG01.aspx

In my opinion, even the expensive equipment does not guarantee good sound and only increases the chances to get it.

My best regards.

 

 

[sandyk]

raym87

"After all, as already stated, bit perfect = bit perfect = bit perfect.

It's not just my thought, a few recent posters have eluded to this."

I think you will find that with at least one poster, that was being sarcastic. With the upload that I previously mentioned, it was compared with a previous upload where the +5V Linear PSU had not been used. The UL using the +5V low noise, low impedance PSU was judged as considerably better, yet the previous uploaded version was deemed to be better than with the rip of another CD from the same pressing at the recipients end.

During the development of the linear PSU , over several different versions, I also had input from a NY based CA member who compared uploaded .wav files for me , as well as several RG members in the U.K. and Europe.

Peter St. and several other CA members have already posted about hearing differences with previously uploaded .wav comparison files having the same checksums.(over a year ago)

I know that this statement will not sit too well with many qualified EEs here, but that's what I hear, as well as several CA members, and a couple of dozen Rock Grotto members who have been regular recipients of my uploaded comparison .wav files in the last 2 years. Around 10 local RG and DIYAudio members from Sydney have also heard them directly from my PC.

Even an 82 year old retired U.S. Professor of Music was able to clearly identify the same differences when listening with headphones.

 

SandyK

 

 

 

[SteveChicago]

We are chicken and egging here. If system and set up are essential to hearing SQ benefits of player software then how do we properly assess those benefits?

 

None of us are in a controlled environment or testing lab. We must evaluate player software with the systems we have. Either the software affects the SQ in our respective systems or not. In my system I am hard pressed to hear a difference and my hearing is still pretty good.

 

So I must conclude that player software is like any other system change. If it improves SQ great; if not, move on.

 

[Raym87]

Miska said 'Some apps merely copy the bits from audio files to the audio device. Others apply hefty amounts of processing...'

 

A very good point. So we can summise that those that do apply processing (apart from adding 0's to word length) are not giving bitperfect playback, therefore we are not then comparing like with like. How can we tell we are getting bit perfect playback, not with our ears certainly. Expensive test equipment isnt something I have, neither do I have a Weiss DAC (maybe other makes as well) that have a bit perfect playback test system on them.

 

My previous post about the 'theory' I quoted, was just that, a theory. I have no evidence to confirm or deny, it was just a thought (its not often I have those either). I will reiterate AGAIN for those that can't be bothered to read through, with Windoze apps differences are clearly apparent, apps on the MacMini to me, appear to show no differences at all.

 

[PeterSt]

So we can summise that those that do apply processing (apart from adding 0's to word length) are not giving bitperfect playback,

 

No, that is not what Miska will have meant.

 

There can be "heavy processing" and output is still bit perfect.

Or not "heavy processing", and output is bit perfect.

 

Happens on PCs and happens on MACs.

 

Of course there's also "DSP" not giving bit perfect output (intendedly). But that's another subject and not related.

 

Peter

 

[Raym87]

Oh well....now I'm confused.

I suppose changes to bit patterns could be made without effecting bit perfectness, say for example in the realms of timing, TTL levels and signal purity (ringing etc) ...etc etc. the data stream is modified but the bits remain the same.

I can accept that...but why do I hear differences on one system and not another???

 

 

[Miska]

How can we tell we are getting bit perfect playback, not with our ears certainly.

 

I'm very strict on definition of "bit perfect", when I speak about it I mean that exactly the data in file goes to DAC exactly as it is, without adding or changing anything. So upsampling can never be bit perfect, since the number of samples going to DAC doesn't equal those in file.

 

At least if you have 24-bit audio interface and RedBook material, HQPlayer should never give you bit perfect output. It's intention is not at all to be bit perfect, but to provide upsampling, dither/noise shaper, convolution engine, etc. Heavy DSP that is. Partially do the same DSP most DAC chips do internally, but without resource limitations.

 

apart from adding 0's to word length

 

By the way, I consider this as non-bit perfect too. And actually incorrect thing to do in first place. This way a 24-bit DAC is 8-LSB short of full 0 dBFS level always with 16-bit data.

 

 

[PeterSt]

I suppose changes to bit patterns could be made without effecting bit perfectness

 

That is not what I meant;

 

Think very simply and very literally like :

 

1 + 1 = 2 (simple process)

 

(1 x 10) + (1 x 10) = 20 (additional processing)

(the x 10 is a necessary process)

20 / 10 = 2

(devide by 10 because we know we multiplied by 10 before).

 

Asnwer of both is the same, but the latter method draws more current.

Theoretically ...

 

That's really it. Don't think too complex.

Of course it is allowed to think that this is total BS (and inaudible). But that's another subject, haha.

 

Peter

 

[Raym87]

I'll leave it there...????????????