Debate Thread: Scott's Hi-res Audio Test - Page 60 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 734Likes
 
Thread Tools
post #1771 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 08:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post
It appears you don't read your own web site. Now you're claiming that Mark Levinson and Lexicon don't manufacture High End audio equipment.
I don't need to read our website because I have written it all .

Lexicon no longer produces any high-end products. My company does install a lot of their DD-8 amplifier though:



It is a very compact 8-channel by 125 watt amplifier. It is a great solution for custom whole house audio. A number of companies are reselling them under their brands.

As to Mark Levinson, I already showed how they have quality engineering:





The parent company, Harman is more dedicated to audio science and value of blind listening tests than any other company I know. I have sat through their tests and can attest to their value. Dr. Sean Olive who leads their subjective quality lab, is now president of Audio Engineering Society. It is a privilege to stand behind their company and their expert designers. Their work and standing in the industry speaks for itself.

Who is the manufacturer of your audio gear and what are their credentials in this regard?

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1772 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 08:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

As to Mark Levinson,
As to Mark Levinson, nothing you've said demonstrates they're not a High End audio marque. Lexicon was well known for selling a rebadged Oppo player for $3500.

Last edited by RobertR; 07-07-2014 at 09:49 PM.
RobertR is online now  
post #1773 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 08:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post
As to Mark Levinson, nothing you've said demonstrates they're not a High End audio marque.
Looks like the plot is lost. You made the fallacious claim that high-end companies are all about price first and went on to say I promoted them. I mentioned I am promoting quality engineering. You proceeded to challenge me with the mention of Mark levinson. So I showed you that they absolutely did care about quality engineering with specific product performance that best the products you promote . I didn't tell you they are not high-end. Of course they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert
Levinson was well known for selling a rebadged Oppo player for $3500.
No they were not. That was their Lexicon brand.

So what brand of audio equipment do you own or is that a state secret?

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1774 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 09:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
I didn't tell you they are not high-end. Of course they are.
Thanks for finally admitting that you promote High End audio products.


Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
No they were not. That was their Lexicon brand.
Wrong: It was an Oppo being sold as a Lexicon:

http://www.audioholics.com/blu-ray-a...icon-outside-1

Nice stuff you promote there.
RobertR is online now  
post #1775 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 09:32 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post
Thanks for finally admitting that you promote High End audio products.
Such childish debating tactics: "thanks for finally admitting..." I have not promoted any product here. I have discussed quality engineering and given examples.

Speaking of products, you once again evaded answering what audio brands you own. This is an audio forum. Why is it so difficult for you to share what audio gear you have?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob
Wrong: It was an Oppo being sold as a Lexicon:
That is what I said. You claimed it was ML which sold the Oppo and I said it was Lexicon that did that. The only thing wrong was you saying ML had done so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob
Nice stuff you promote there.
I didn't promote that "stuff" or anything like it. I said that the company builds quality engineering. You are showing disdain for only company that routinely uses double blind testing to produce its products. You are clearly demonstrating that this debate is just about a personal fight than any belief in objective audio engineering.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1776 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 09:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post


I didn't promote that "stuff" or anything like it.
Right. You sell the stuff that you tell everyone is audibly "better", but you don't "promote" it, even though the sales pitch is in your signature. I see.
RobertR is online now  
post #1777 of 2920 Old 07-07-2014, 10:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,846
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 224 Post(s)
Liked: 522
Does the dedication to engineering by Haman extend to their receivers WRT HDMI jitter?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #1778 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 02:52 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Here you go:


You have no measurement of "mass market AVRs" yet you are sure that their jitter is inaudible. So your position is absolute and not "case by case" as Arny said.


You keep arguing with me yet don't know if your position is different than mine??? What kind of logic is that? How about sitting back and only object when you know you are expressing a different opinion.


It is case by case.
Such a shameless representation of my quote. That quote deals only with the measurements you posted in this thread and for which you refuse to be held accountable.

Are the measurements you posted in this thread audible? It's a yes, no, or I don't know answer. Why do you refuse to state your position?
koturban is offline  
post #1779 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 05:25 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
Does the dedication to engineering by Haman extend to their receivers WRT HDMI jitter?
You mean Harman Kardon? If so I don't have any experience with them. I would say chances are that it is not focused on best performance and instead, designed to compete on price/features with other mass market products. It may not even be designed by Harman.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1780 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 05:35 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
Such a shameless representation of my quote. That quote deals only with the measurements you posted in this thread and for which you refuse to be held accountable.
OK, let's make that clear then. Does your AVR have audible jitter?

Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban
Are the measurements you posted in this thread audible? It's a yes, no, or I don't know answer. Why do you refuse to state your position?
Because I like to make it absolutely clear that you have no idea what my position is yet object left and right to everything I say. That means this is a personal issue for you and nothing to do with audio.

You have contributed nothing technically to this thread. A trait you share with Robert and a few other people frequently posting in the thread. You have not run Arny's test either so no interest in double blind tests, or how "audible jitter" is.

Objectivity has a horrible reputation in forums because of such behavior. You stay up night and day to complain and protest. And complain and protest regarding what? You don't even know! It is not like I am here to tell you power cords sound different. Or that putting some balls in a bowl makes your audio system better. No. I am explaining audio architecture and show measurements to dispel myths that are spread by people with no education, professional experience, industry exposure, or avid student of audio.

It is very important to show that we, our objectivity camp, is not all about personal fights. That we do and understand technology. That we are transparent when less than good engineering is applied to audio. That we don't fight someone when we confess to not knowing their position! That we read these posts and let the information sink in, including my full opinion which was posted in this very thread.

This is the lesson that has not yet been understood:

Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

well, in that case let me thank you [amir] for your contributions. I KNOW I could not have kept my patience as you have, let alone maintained a sense of humour!

It's funny how hard *we* can go to maintain our rightness, and how quickly that line is crossed where we no longer wish to learn (despite our objections to the contrary) where we fight tooth and nail...usually because we know our position is so tenuous that the slightest 'loss' means the whole game is over.

FFS, Amir has sat here page after page and SHOWN how, and under what possible conditions jitter may be audible.

Hey, if it were a cable debate, and we showed with maths and sims that there could not possibly be a difference, well that would have proved it no?

So why the **** in an 'argument' where the shoe is on the other foot does it suddenly become irrelevant what the science says??

My take on what the fear might be is the worry of what might happen if we concede a point of argument. The 'other side' will drive a frickin lorry thru the door if we do.

I mean, there only has to be ONE person who hears a power cord (for sake of illustration) in what seems to be a proper test and the whole frickin lot of the rest of them will claim it as proof that they too can hear it.

No they can't, 'one in a million' means just that. But we KNOW every single one of them thinks they can hear it, using that person as proof, and even less urge to test the truth properly. After all it has been shown.

So, we had better clamp down HARD on the one ever coming out, if only to keep the lid on the rest.

So, move on to something far less controversial than PCs, but as long as it falls into audiofool territory we had better clamp down on that too. It is just safer that way, keep each and every genie in the bottle.

So the need to put amir in his place, and keep the lid hammered on tight. Because the ramifications of this little argument go waaaay past it's tiny borders.

""Oh, but amir has not given any evidence of audibilty"" (apart from the science you mean? The science that would be perfectly acceptable in a different argument, that the one we are talking about???).

Be totally honest here. If he told you that he had found, to his satisfaction, that turning the front panel on and off on his thingamabob had an audible difference, would you accept that?

What then his findings of jitter?

We know you would not accept his results, the genie is too terrifying to contemplate.

So don't come back at me with 'amir has yet to show audibility' ok? It is a definitional thing you know. Some things, by definition, are inaudible.

Bit like cancer, it cannot be cured hence any cure of cancer is untrue (why we are always then exhorted to donate to cancer research is beyond me).

All of you could be right, it may be completely inaudible.

But you sure as hell have not shown it by your arguments. Unless 'nanah nanah nah' counts as an argument.
Sadly your next post will also be 'nanah nanah nah." As will Robert's.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1781 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 06:04 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post
Right. You sell the stuff that you tell everyone is audibly "better", but you don't "promote" it, even though the sales pitch is in your signature. I see.
Go ahead and complain about quality engineering. This is what engineering means:



I would think there is nothing worst for a man than to be against WD-40 and duct tape. Live with that!

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1782 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 06:26 AM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Sure. I will start with you. Then I will add Robert. Krab. Spkr.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
The only explanation is that they don't believe this is a "case by case" situation. They consider all the cases the same: "jitter is not audible." Hence my objection to the argument that "we are not saying jitter is not audible." Their actions telegraphs otherwise.
Is that what I actually said or is that the usual distorted version of what I said? If you were an amplifier distorting that much, it would be considered broken.
spkr is offline  
post #1783 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 06:29 AM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
This is the lesson that has not yet been understood:
Who is terry j that you keep quoting? Better yet, what is he?
spkr is offline  
post #1784 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 06:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 753 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr View Post
Who is terry j that you keep quoting? Better yet, what is he?
Terryj - past participant of these forums at AVS.
arnyk is offline  
post #1785 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 06:41 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
OK, let's make that clear then. Does your AVR have audible jitter?


Because I like to make it absolutely clear that you have no idea what my position is yet object left and right to everything I say. That means this is a personal issue for you and nothing to do with audio.

You have contributed nothing technically to this thread. A trait you share with Robert and a few other people frequently posting in the thread. You have not run Arny's test either so no interest in double blind tests, or how "audible jitter" is.

Objectivity has a horrible reputation in forums because of such behavior. You stay up night and day to complain and protest. And complain and protest regarding what? You don't even know! It is not like I am here to tell you power cords sound different. Or that putting some balls in a bowl makes your audio system better. No. I am explaining audio architecture and show measurements to dispel myths that are spread by people with no education, professional experience, industry exposure, or avid student of audio.

It is very important to show that we, our objectivity camp, is not all about personal fights. That we do and understand technology. That we are transparent when less than good engineering is applied to audio. That we don't fight someone when we confess to not knowing their position! That we read these posts and let the information sink in, including my full opinion which was posted in this very thread.

This is the lesson that has not yet been understood:



Sadly your next post will also be 'nanah nanah nah." As will Robert's.
I have only objected to one thing: your careless categorizing of the components you "measured" as "poor" "better", etc. The reason I object is because you have not provided any sort of quantifiable threshold to which one can say that the measurements you have posted fall into the realm of audibility, nor have you made any effort to post results of a bias-controlled listening test that shows somebody can hear it.

It matters not whether I take the test. I don't have to leap off of a building to know I'm going to fall. If, on the other hand, you believe you can fly, then show the world. Also, you have dismissed Arny's efforts because you claim he used a "lousy tool", so anything I post certainly isn't going to be compelling in your eyes. I have also asked you explicitly what would be a "proper tool" and, to no surprise, you haven't answered.

We are in complete agreement on one thing. I don't know your position on the audibility of jitter wrt the measurements you posted because YOU WON'T STATE WHAT THAT POSITION IS,EVEN WHEN I ASK YOU DIRECTLY.

I can't be any more explicit:

Are the jitter measurements for the equipment you posted in this thread audible?

Why is this question so difficult for you to answer?
Ratman likes this.
koturban is offline  
post #1786 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 07:36 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
I have only objected to one thing: your careless categorizing of the components you "measured" as "poor" "better", etc.
You mean this one?



If so, I get your feeling. I honestly do. But this is how engineering works. We measure designs and characterize the performance of the system. In this case that is how we measure performance of clock regeneration (PLL) circuits. It is the same as measuring a car that goes from 0 to 60 in 12 seconds and saying that is "slow." Or a car doing the same under 3 seconds as exceptionally fast. To someone not into cars those numbers have no meaning and may feel insulted that their car is rate as "slow." But that is the normal characterization in that industry.

A device that does not reject incoming jitter can have jitter that is dependent on what source you use with it. I could do a hundred blind listening tests but if I don't test it with your source, the results will not apply to your situation.

On the other hand, a device which nicely filters incoming jitter has far better design and no dependency on the source device.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kutarban
The reason I object is because you have not provided any sort of quantifiable threshold to which one can say that the measurements you have posted fall into the realm of audibility, nor have you made any effort to post results of a bias-controlled listening test that shows somebody can hear it.
The car reviewer above has not shown that I get to work any slower with the 0 to 60 time of 12 seconds versus 3. The data however is still very useful to an enthusiast looking for high performance cars.

This is just how we communicate with each other as engineers, separating performant devices from not. I can give you hundreds of examples. Here is a quick one from AES paper by Analog Devices which is one of the largest IC manufacturers in audio world: https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/co...15&rndx=878460



See? This is how we converse. We characterize a circuit as potentially having too much jitter and with it possibility of audible distortion. This is again how AES technical committee talked about the same issue with respect to HDMI:

http://www.aes.org/technical/trends/report2012.pdf
Co-chairs:
Vicky Melchior and Josh Reiss, Chairs

HDMI, the point-to-point connector required for BR and HD video, has excellent bandwidth and an Ethernet data link (HDMI 1.4), but lacks an audio clock. HDMI receivers must derive audio word clock from the video pixel clock, commonly resulting in very high jitter that affects quality and can be audible. Some high end receivers address the jitter and many companies are researching it but current solutions are expensive and uncommon.

They were not trying to communicate with laymen but other engineers and researchers in audio. And the language they used is very much consistent with what I use in annotate that graph.

I know it creates angst for many of you but I can't bend to artificial rules created to defend a religion in audio using lay standards and tactics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kutarban
It matters not whether I take the test. I don't have to leap off of a building to know I'm going to fall. If, on the other hand, you believe you can fly, then show the world.
I didn't say I can fly but did take the test. Arny claimed I would be the last person to do that. Well, I took the test and was and is one of only two people who have done so.

This is beside the fact that I have made no claims based on my hearing ability. You keep confusing this discussion with some other people. I didn't show up here and say one power cord sounds better to my ears and therefore you must believe. I came here and showed published measurements that show HDMI implementations to be poor in mass market AVRs. The same position was stated independently by AES. So if this is not flying, it sure is "falling with style!"

Remember that I am in your camp. I know our tactics. I know our tricks. That trick of demanding listening tests or else we are going to dismiss science and engineering presented is misplaced at best, and completely intellectually dishonest at worst. The point is proven by the fact that none of you as a group want to post your results. Arny wouldn't. You wouldn't. Spkr Wouldn't. Robert wouldn't. Ratman wouldn't. And the list goes on and on.

Arny presented (nicely) a number of files. The worst case ones are obvious to anyone to detect. So if you are saying you are failing the test then you have not bothered to even play the files.

Edit: added Ratman to the list .

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

Last edited by amirm; 07-08-2014 at 07:39 AM.
amirm is online now  
post #1787 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 07:49 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
Also, you have dismissed Arny's efforts because you claim he used a "lousy tool", so anything I post certainly isn't going to be compelling in your eyes. I have also asked you explicitly what would be a "proper tool" and, to no surprise, you haven't answered.
I have answered the darn question. You just don't pay attention and keep demanding that I answer it again.

Here it is: Debate Thread: Scott's Hi-res Audio Test

--------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
FOOBAR2000 has its Set Start and Set End feature to allow people to exploit this sort of thing. That's the standard implementation of this kind of feature and is IME about as good as it gets.
As good as it gets? I think it is one of the worst implementations. So that everyone can follow us, here is the sample picture of the UI:



First problem is that when you move the slider it does not update the time code. You have to hit the Start or End buttons to see it. This means a bunch of hunting with a slider to try to get it back to the same segment.

The slider cannot be stretched which means that it is very difficult to get it down to tenth of a second which is what you need when you want to isolate say, a single guitar pick.

When you hit the "set start" button nothing happens. It actually remembers that point but it shows no visual notification. It is only when you hit the end button that it shows where the start was. I want to see that marker so that for example I can give myself 1 second after that. Without seeing where the start position is, I wind up with a pain in the neck trial and error.

Then there is lack of looping. It plays from start to end of that segment but won't repeat. You want it to repeat so that you then switch inputs and hear their effects.

The other problem of switching tracks. There is no soft dissolve so you get a click as you switch between the input tracks.

Compounding all of this is that every time you start the tool it forgets it settings so all the pain repeats to adjust the slider.

And then there is the undiscoverable way of saving the results. You have to hit exit and then it gives you a chance to save the results. The file name however is blank. It should instead start with the file names. The ABX box often hides the tracks and when you are in the save dialog box, you cannot move it to see your track names.

All of this make it a lot harder to setup the right test. I gave up and just used the first segment I found. It was just too much work to try to locate others.

So if one wants to have less revealing results, you can say this is a good tool. Otherwise, it leaves a lot to be desired versus ones written by people who do this for a living.


--------------------------------------

And then this follow up post to the exact same question you are asking:

--------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
If FOOBAR2000 is the worst ABX Comparator, then you should be able to quite easily provide us with a link to a similarly-priced but far better product.
Good morning Arny. I see you were up late posting these messages. Hopefully you didn't do it on my account .

Anyway, back to your post, you said and I quote: "FOOBAR2000 has its Set Start and Set End feature to allow people to exploit this sort of thing. That's the standard implementation of this kind of feature and is IME about as good as it gets. "

I responded by explaining how those features are poorly implemented and gave examples of why. My reference is proper tools designed in-house for this kind of work and spending years using them and realizing the benefits of the features that I talked about. And it was not just our tools at Microsoft that was this way. Same was true of the tools at other companies like Dolby that I had used in independent shootouts. That is my reference and not some other free tool you are asking me to produce.

All the failings of Foobar ABX would tilt the game in favor of finding no difference. So I get why we defend it and call it "as good as it gets." To someone who has not used any other tools with superior abilities, they would accept that and then wonder why they are not hearing the differences that are really there, but hard to isolate with Foobar ABX.

Now that you know the right feature set you can do your own search and find the right tool. Look at their UI and see if they have the features I was talking about. Here is a good example of a free tool that covers a lot of the bases that Foobar ABX does not: http://lacinato.com/cm/software/othersoft/abx.



Right away you see the Loop button as highlighted in the above sample screenshot. If you use the tool you will see that the sliders work without having to play anything. Better yet, there are two of them so you can position them closely to each other. In Foobar, the slider handle is thick and there is only one of it. This means that if you place the start and stop at say one second apart, you can't even tell that you have done that! They handle covers that short start-stop blue line.

Notice the ability to set gains as to equalize volumes if necessary.

The "offset" comes in handy for your track specifically. You have that deafening tone at the beginning which you need to skip over. And this lets you do that.

Is it perfect? No. It uses Java runtime and while it says it doesn't need a separate download, it asked me to do exactly that. The link at Oracle downloads version 1.7 and the tool wants 1.8. Good luck finding that version on Oracle site. But you can find it and once there the program runs without any installations. Simply double click on the .exe and it runs.

As much as I despise Java, in this case it does enable cross platform ability from Linux to Mac.

Another miss is not being able to enter the timecode directly instead of using the sliders.

And the best part is that I don't have to look at the silly mask of an alien in my task bar from Foobar.

Anyway go ahead and use it and then let us know if Foobar ABX is still as good as it gets Arny.


And no, none of this excuses you from running and reporting your results. If you did, then you would also see the effect of the problems I explained.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1788 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 07:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,539
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Edit: added Ratman to the list .
Good for you.
You keep providing the same quotes/charts/graphs to make your proclamation(s), but never answer a simple question.

When does "jitter" via HDMI become audible? Provide a number, testing data, plant a flag in the ground and take a stance. Commit!

And just in case you are confused... no one is really arguing that "jitter" doesn't exist or that "jitter" is less or worse via HDMI or S/PDIF.

We are asking the expert(s?) when does it become "AUDIBLE"?

Please help us Obi-Wan!!!
Ratman is offline  
post #1789 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 08:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 89
The foobar ABX tool is good enough for the purpose. The great advantage, and more important than some minor interface design issues, is the better control of player output options.


Good engineers have the ability to do great things with simple tools. Somehow the mediocre ones always end up with the expensive tools and a management function.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #1790 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 08:21 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
Good for you.
You keep providing the same quotes/charts/graphs to make your proclamation(s), but never answer a simple question.

When does "jitter" via HDMI become audible? Provide a number, testing data, plant a flag in the ground and take a stance. Commit!

And just in case you are confused... no one is really arguing that "jitter" doesn't exist or that "jitter" is less or worse via HDMI or S/PDIF.

We are asking the expert(s?) when does it become "AUDIBLE"?

Please help us Obi-Wan!!!
Obi-Wan does not help the dark side But I will help you some.

Whether jitter is audible or not depends on a few factors:

1. Its level and spectrum. Real products have a composite of different jitter products from random, to band-limited random, to many tones. Therefore possibilities are endless and you can't quantify jitter to be any one thing to ask about its audibility.

2. The music content. Music can mask jitter or not. Same thing goes on in audio compression where many tracks are "easy" in the way they hide distortions. While others are more revealing.

3. Your hearing ability with respect to non-linear distortions such as jitter.

Arny was kind enough to generate a test that fixed the unknowns for #1 and #2 . He picked one music clip and applied 30 Hz "jitter" to it. 30 Hz modulation is low frequency and hence would be least likely to be detected. In other words, it tilts the odds toward "inaudibility." Yet, I am suggesting that you run and report your results because it then solves #3 .

If you do worse than me, then you should have no worry whatsoever about jitter. To you jitter is not audible concern as your ears are not tuned to hear it.

If you do the same as me and we get enough people that have the same results, then we can then draw some conclusions regarding the audibility of 30 Hz "jitter" in that one clip.

If you do better than me, then it means you are highly sensitive to jitter and chances are you will hear it before many others.

So the answer you all seek depends on you doing some homework. You will never have a feel for what distortion we are talking about if you never experience it.
stereoeditor likes this.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1791 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 08:26 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post
The foobar ABX tool is good enough for the purpose. The great advantage, and more important than some minor interface design issues, is the better control of player output options.

Good engineers have the ability to do great things with simple tools. Somehow the mediocre ones always end up with the expensive tools and a management function.
We don't want "good enough" tools any more than we want "good enough" audio products. At least I don't .

The purpose of a blind testing rule is to *maximize* chances of finding a difference that technically is there. We don't want to put our head in the sand celebrating that we found no difference. It is the other way around. We want to search for positive detection as much as we can as that confirms that we have created the right test. And by finding and fixing these problems we maximize the chances of transparency for the largest audience.

I have used great tools and the worst ones possible. A good example of the latter is the topic at hand: HDMI. HDMI handshaking causes multi-second muting, hiccups, etc. as you switch inputs. That totally disrupts my ability to detect differences.

So no, good enough is not good enough .

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1792 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 08:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
We don't want "good enough" tools any more than we want "good enough" audio products. At least I don't .

The purpose of a blind testing rule is to *maximize* chances of finding a difference that technically is there. We don't want to put our head in the sand celebrating that we found no difference. It is the other way around. We want to search for positive detection as much as we can as that confirms that we have created the right test. And by finding and fixing these problems we maximize the chances of transparency for the largest audience.

I have used great tools and the worst ones possible. A good example of the latter is the topic at hand: HDMI. HDMI handshaking causes multi-second muting, hiccups, etc. as you switch inputs. That totally disrupts my ability to detect differences.

So no, good enough is not good enough .

You can maximize chances all you want. At some point an audible difference can't be heard anymore.
You seem to have trouble accepting this simple fact of live. And so far I see you only evading to answer this simple question about the level of audibility.


That is your loss as you can't let go and focus on more important things like getting better mastering of content or a delivery standard that sends for example compression metadata along to select from depending on the listening environment.
And we already have such a standard but, the horror, it's only available across hdmi and hardly used for music content.
RobertR likes this.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #1793 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 10:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,539
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Obi-Wan does not help the dark side But I will help you some.

Whether jitter is audible or not depends on a few factors:

1. Its level and spectrum. Real products have a composite of different jitter products from random, to band-limited random, to many tones. Therefore possibilities are endless and you can't quantify jitter to be any one thing to ask about its audibility.

2. The music content. Music can mask jitter or not. Same thing goes on in audio compression where many tracks are "easy" in the way they hide distortions. While others are more revealing.

3. Your hearing ability with respect to non-linear distortions such as jitter.

Arny was kind enough to generate a test that fixed the unknowns for #1 and #2 . He picked one music clip and applied 30 Hz "jitter" to it. 30 Hz modulation is low frequency and hence would be least likely to be detected. In other words, it tilts the odds toward "inaudibility." Yet, I am suggesting that you run and report your results because it then solves #3 .

If you do worse than me, then you should have no worry whatsoever about jitter. To you jitter is not audible concern as your ears are not tuned to hear it.

If you do the same as me and we get enough people that have the same results, then we can then draw some conclusions regarding the audibility of 30 Hz "jitter" in that one clip.

If you do better than me, then it means you are highly sensitive to jitter and chances are you will hear it before many others.

So the answer you all seek depends on you doing some homework. You will never have a feel for what distortion we are talking about if you never experience it.
I'm sorry...
I am not as experienced and educated as others.
Did you answer my (and other's) question concisely? Why does a simple question always generate a new "novel"?

This is like "pay no attention to man behind the curtain".
Or... if one may be religious, that whatever one writes or speaks should be accepted on faith alone.

It's okay... you can tell the truth.

Be a helpful guy rather than gunning for Arny (and those that don't sit on your side of the fence).

Last edited by Ratman; 07-08-2014 at 10:57 AM.
Ratman is offline  
post #1794 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 11:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 753 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Obi-Wan does not help the dark side
Arny was kind enough to generate a test that fixed the unknowns for #1 and #2 . He picked one music clip and applied 30 Hz "jitter" to it. 30 Hz modulation is low frequency and hence would be least likely to be detected. In other words, it tilts the odds toward "inaudibility." Yet, I am suggesting that you run and report your results because it then solves #3 .
Love to see Amir pursuing his favorite hobby which may be inventing science. The audibility of jitter (FM distortion) is given in the scientificf literature by Zwicker and Fastl:



30 Hz modulation is far from being the lowest frequency and is also not the least likely to be detected. I chose it for one reason and one reason only which is that it showed up repeatedly in HDMI-related equipment tests, probably because it is a very commonly used video frame rate in A/V media. Furthermore I have offered to provide similar test files based on other jitter frequencies if people would agree to ABX them using any reasonable ABX comparator.

Hearing no relevant offers, I have not gone any further at this time.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Just noticable FM disotrion.png
Views:	95
Size:	113.2 KB
ID:	153401  
arnyk is offline  
post #1795 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RichB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 8,796
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
I'm sorry...
I am not as experienced and educated as others.
Did you answer my (and other's) question concisely? Why does a simple question always generate a new "novel"?

This is like "pay no attention to man behind the curtain".
Or... if one may be religious, that whatever one writes or speaks should be accepted on faith alone.

It's okay... you can tell the truth.
Be a helpful guy rather than gunning for Arny (and those that don't sit on your side of the fence).
Amirm has posted measurements demonstrating higher levels of jitter in many mainstream AVRs. Audibility is depends on the factors he listed.

If your AVR can quickly switch between analog, COAX, Toslink, and HDMI it is not difficult to perform some listening tests.
Make sure they are level matched, many AVRs have some adjustments, although usually within 1DB, so that may not be ideal.
You can even have someone else change the source so you cannot tell which one is playing.

I can hear a differences playing LPCM source material via the Oppo BDP-105/Marantz AV8801 and BDP-95/Yamaha RX-A820 receiver.

- Rich

Oppo Beta Group

Oppo BDP-105D | Oppo HA-1 | Oppo PM-1 | Parasound A51 | Revel Salon, Voice, Studio | Velodyne HGS-15
RichB is offline  
post #1796 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 11:44 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Love to see Amir pursuing his favorite hobby which may be inventing science. The audibility of jitter (FM distortion) is given in the scientificf literature by Zwicker and Fastl:



30 Hz modulation is far from being the lowest frequency and is also not the least likely to be detected. I chose it for one reason and one reason only which is that it showed up repeatedly in HDMI-related equipment tests, probably because it is a very commonly used video frame rate in A/V media. Furthermore I have offered to provide similar test files based on other jitter frequencies if people would agree to ABX them using any reasonable ABX comparator.

Hearing no relevant offers, I have not gone any further at this time.
To me, "good engineering" would be to account for worst case scenarios.

In post 1786, Amir's snippet from AES speaks of "highly jittered" outputs from DBS set top boxes. Could this be considered a worst case scenario?

Would you consider the files you generated representative of what was mentioned, or is this something different?
koturban is offline  
post #1797 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 01:03 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
I'm sorry...
I am not as experienced and educated as others.
Did you answer my (and other's) question concisely? Why does a simple question always generate a new "novel"?

This is like "pay no attention to man behind the curtain".
Or... if one may be religious, that whatever one writes or speaks should be accepted on faith alone.

It's okay... you can tell the truth.

Be a helpful guy rather than gunning for Arny (and those that don't sit on your side of the fence).
I answered your question directly. Ask me what part of it you don't understand and I am happy to expand.

I was not gunning for Arny as he would give you the same answer.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1798 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 01:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,224
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 865 Post(s)
Liked: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
To me, "good engineering" would be to account for worst case scenarios.
That is not my definition but let's leave it at that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kutarban
In post 1786, Amir's snippet from AES speaks of "highly jittered" outputs from DBS set top boxes. Could this be considered a worst case scenario?
No. It means what it means in the paper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kutarban
Would you consider the files you generated representative of what was mentioned, or is this something different?
I didn't generate any files. Arny did.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #1799 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 01:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,539
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post
If your AVR can quickly switch between analog, COAX, Toslink, and HDMI it is not difficult to perform some listening tests.
Thanks... never "heard" a difference. Do you? Explain, if possible.
Ratman is offline  
post #1800 of 2920 Old 07-08-2014, 01:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,539
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
I answered your question directly. Ask me what part of it you don't understand and I am happy to expand.

I was not gunning for Arny as he would give you the same answer.
Let Arny speak for himself.

When does jitter become "audible" when using HDMI vs. S/PDIF? Thanks in advance for your direct answer.
Ratman is offline  
Closed Thread Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off