Debate Thread: Scott's Hi-res Audio Test - Page 72 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 734Likes
 
Thread Tools
post #2131 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 10:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,313
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
Do you have any plans to try this with speakers, Amir?
I am curious what the experts have to say about this article relative to the test using headphones.




http://stereos.about.com/od/Headphon...ent-People.htm


I also found the podcast Scott had a few weeks ago on loudness related hearing loss interesting in that it is cumulative. So listening to loud music or canons early in one's life might not affect you until later as your exposure accumulates. I am curious if stereoeditor and/or Amirm disagree with that. Posts I have read from both seemed (at least to me) to come to a different conclusion.
arnyk likes this.

Last edited by Randy Bessinger; 07-19-2014 at 11:54 AM.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2132 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 11:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,848
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 522
It seems to me, Randy, that it tends to be degenerative over time and can be exacerbated by things like diabetes and other illnesses.

But what I'm curious about is that recently Atkinson was in Washington State while Amir also lives there. It seems quite the coincidence that Casey Kasem's body has somehow vanished from the Washington funeral home. I hope the authorities are on this.

"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 #2133 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 11:56 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
It seems to me, Randy, that it tends to be degenerative over time and can be exacerbated by things like diabetes and other illnesses.

But what I'm curious about is that recently Atkinson was in Washington State while Amir also lives there. It seems quite the coincidence that Casey Kasem's body has somehow vanished from the Washington funeral home. I hope the authorities are on this.
You believe in this nonsense but not UFOs and human abductions???? There is no area 51 in washington state in case you did not know.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #2134 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 12:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,848
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 522
Kasem's body disappears and you're on a trip. Hmmmmm. Of course there's no Area 51 in Washington but there's no denying you're there and Atkinson visited.

"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 #2135 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 12:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JWhip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wayne, PA
Posts: 4,217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
You believe in this nonsense but not UFOs and human abductions???? There is no area 51 in washington state in case you did not know.
I think Amir and Mr. Atkinson were too busy partying in the forest with Bigfoot to worry about Casey Kassem.
JWhip is online now  
post #2136 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,660
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1567 Post(s)
Liked: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
The usual rule of thumb is that headphone listening gives a very different sonic perspective from loudspeaker listening.

Overall, my listening is about 50/50 speaker versus headphones/earphones. My non-speaker listening is about 50/50 headphones versus earphones. All monitoring systems are significantly optimized using electronic equalization. I'be mentioned my use of Shure E3 earphones, but they are not the only ones I have by far. For example I have a pair of ER4s, which I loathe. I also have a collection of various headphones, with AT M50s, Superlux HD 668, Sennheiser RS170, Sony MDR 7506, etc.

Part of that difference can be an acute perception of technical flaws in the recording due to the absence of masking by the listening room and speakers.

Therefore, using headphones to hear technical flaws during recording and editing and mixing can be OK, but the final product needs to be auditioned and perhaps adjusted some more using loudspeakers before distribution.

People who use headphones frequently and also use speakers for mastering can sometimes develop a pretty good sense of how headphone listening translates to speaker listening, and get pretty close to a good finished product with headphones.
That is an excellent post Arny, a reference one. I found nothing to disagree with.
NorthSky is offline  
post #2137 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 01:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,660
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1567 Post(s)
Liked: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
One note of caution guys: as you become a trained listener, you get to suffer a lot more when listening to less than perfect music. You will keep hunting for distortions whether you are in a test scenario or not. I do that routinely as I listen to radio in my car for example. While in balance I am happy to have this skill, it has its down sides. I was once in Newport Beach area shooting wildlife pictures and the rental car had XM radio. Man, I could not listen to the darn thing. The compression artifacts were a constant annoyance. The service has millions of customers so clearly this is not an issue for untrained listeners.
Would you say that it might lessen the emotional satisfaction/freedom, Amir? ...And downgrade our musical appreciation?
NorthSky is offline  
post #2138 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 06:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JWhip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wayne, PA
Posts: 4,217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 240
I understand where Amir is coming from. When I used to do Blu-ray reviews, after awhile, I found that I didn't enjoy the films as much as I was too busy nitpicking or keeping track of the little things and missing out on the big picture. So I stopped and now enjoy the films unfettered by those concerns. As for audio, I just sit back and enjoy the music. I have some very nice stuff but the music is the key and I plan to keep the music first and foremost. Maybe Amir should simplify and enjoy things more.
JWhip is online now  
post #2139 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 06:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
... There is no area 51 in washington state in case you did not know.
None that you know about at least.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #2140 of 2920 Old 07-19-2014, 08:21 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
This one is for Krabapple who got upset at me for saying that MP3 never achieves transparency even at its maximum data rate. Here is the result of testing Arny's file downsampled to 16/44 compared to MP3 version of the same at 320kbps:

=================

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/19 19:45:33

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44_01.mp3

19:45:33 : Test started.
19:46:21 : 01/01 50.0%
19:46:35 : 02/02 25.0%
19:46:49 : 02/03 50.0% << dog barked in my ear wanting to go out
19:47:03 : 03/04 31.3%
19:47:13 : 04/05 18.8%
19:47:27 : 05/06 10.9%
19:47:38 : 06/07 6.3%
19:47:46 : 07/08 3.5%
19:48:01 : 08/09 2.0%
19:48:19 : 09/10 1.1%
19:48:31 : 10/11 0.6%
19:48:45 : 11/12 0.3%
19:48:58 : 12/13 0.2%
19:49:11 : 13/14 0.1%
19:49:28 : 14/15 0.0%
19:49:52 : 15/16 0.0%
19:49:56 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 15/16 (0.0%)


I just grabbed the first second or so of the file and the difference was so clear, pun intended . I encourage folks to run this test as a type of training for the other tests.

Back to MP3, it simply does not achieve transparency for all content and all ears.
Charles R likes this.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #2141 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 03:23 AM
Newbie
 
onlyconnect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Why? The results with headphones are sufficient to invalidate the position that these differences are inaudible. Your ear doesn't change because you are using headphones vs speakers. If the ears with headphones hear the difference, then clearly we are above threshold of inaudibility.
I have downloaded the keys jangling samples. Can I ask what volume you used for the ABX and whether it is higher than you normally use for music? I found I had to increase it to abnormally high levels. I am also wondering whether we are testing the downsampling algorithm used or something inherent to 16/44.


Tim
krabapple likes this.
onlyconnect is offline  
post #2142 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 05:08 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 onlyconnect View Post
I have downloaded the keys jangling samples. Can I ask what volume you used for the ABX and whether it is higher than you normally use for music? I found I had to increase it to abnormally high levels. I am also wondering whether we are testing the downsampling algorithm used or something inherent to 16/44.
The rule for volume setting during an ABX is that the listener is free to experiment and choose a listening level that they are comfortable with and that helps them hear differences based on them experimenting with the A and B selections.

This particular sample is recorded at a reasonably high level but so much of its energy is at high frequencies that are not heard well that extra volume may be required. You also have to be careful to not push volume so high that your electronics or speakers are pushed into clipping or nonlinearity.


The downsampling algorithm that was used is been around for well over a decade, is well known, is often used, and provides consistently high sonic performance. It has been reviewed by sites devoted to criticizing resampling programs, and performed in the top echelon. It performs very well in technical tests, and listening tests.
arnyk is online now  
post #2143 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 05:19 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
Why? The results with headphones are sufficient to invalidate the position that these differences are inaudible. Your ear doesn't change because you are using headphones vs speakers. If the ears with headphones hear the difference, then clearly we are above threshold of inaudibility.
The counterpoint is that any test like this is only as good as the monitoring chain used to perform the test. The fact that the people developing the best results are using laptop computers, whose audio sections are often compromised for low power operation, is a highly relevant cautionary fact.

If we have to throw all the results to this point out due to nonlinear distortion in the monitoring chains used, it won't be the first time that this has happened with this kind of test. ABX clears up many problematical operational difficulties associated with listening tests, but it doesn't fix inadequate equipment.

I've been investigating this problem and am working on a listening test that is a simple, unmistakable go/nogo test for monitoring systems. It has surprised me, because while I expected that nonlinearity in the electronics would be the most likely problem, it appears that transducer problems can also be very strong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Golden ears" do exist, that differences can be heard with headphones and these conversations become a lot more constructive.
Well trained ears exist and of course there are a lot of people of all ages with damaged hearing. The idea that there are people with hearing that is orders of magnitude better than that of most people with undamaged hearing and adequate preparation has never developed a lot of experienced-based traction. If you understand how the ears work, they are like the rest of the human body - there are definite limits that aren't that hard to run into during testing.

I think the evidence for cloth ears and tin ears is far better than the evidence for golden ears. Pride often seems to go before the fall.
arnyk is online now  
post #2144 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 06:11 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 onlyconnect View Post
I have downloaded the keys jangling samples. Can I ask what volume you used for the ABX and whether it is higher than you normally use for music? I found I had to increase it to abnormally high levels. I am also wondering whether we are testing the downsampling algorithm used or something inherent to 16/44.


Tim
Hi Tim. I don't have a specific volume db to give you since this is my laptop playing. Subjectively, I played the keys jangling at a level that was not painful at all. I say it was average to slightly higher than average.

Now, this could be because my high frequency sensitivity is shot . The spectrum of that track shows that its level keeps increasing as frequencies go up so if your hearing is much more intact than mine, you could have a different experience. It is something that I can't say because I don't hear it myself.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #2145 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 06:44 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 arnyk View Post
Well trained ears exist and of course there are a lot of people of all ages with damaged hearing.
Good morning Arny! Looks like we are back to enjoyable mornings where we wake up to your wisdom, thoughts and experience. Much appreciated.

On this statement, I am a bit surprised with the "of course" they exist. In many of these heated discussions, I read this type of post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Which just points out that both golden ears and golden brains don't exist. The human body has finite limits, many of which we already know.
And this post from our very first interaction:

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
We also see a common audiophile myth, being that there is some magic set of ears someplace that can reliably hear the consequences of some possible technical difference. In fact the sensitivity of the human ears is well known and easy to prove to be limited, even highly limited.
I believe this position was created based on the assumption that no one had shown (to forum members) that they can hear better than others in DBT ABX tests. If so, I hope everyone agrees that once again we were taking absence of data and turning it into one. Clearly there are people with better hearing and our assumption that they don't exist based on online posts and blogs was false.

So let's not keep propagating information that we should have known to be wrong if we had tested people sufficiently enough in blind tests. I know that is how I learned that there were people with far better listening ability than most of the public. That is why I constantly point to needing data to draw conclusions as opposed to absence of one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk
The idea that there are people with hearing that is orders of magnitude better than that of most people with undamaged hearing and adequate preparation has never developed a lot of experienced-based traction. If you understand how the ears work, they are like the rest of the human body - there are definite limits that aren't that hard to run into during testing.
What you giveth with one hand, you took away with the other Arny . I thought you just agreed that there are people who can hear better? Do we not have ample evidence that such people exist? More than one person has post results in this thread that are better than yours for example. How come the "definite limits" are not the same? The ability to hear such distortions when others absolutely cannot hear them points to "orders of magnitude" better. We are hearing distortions that we can pick 100% reliably in DBT ABX with material you created yourself that others absolutely cannot. How can you dismiss this differential with a verbal argument like this? We seem to want to deny data that was gathered under our own set of rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arny
I think the evidence for cloth ears and tin ears is far better than the evidence for golden ears. Pride often seems to go before the fall.
??? The only time pride has gotten in the way is from people in this thread who have been the most vocal skeptics about hearing such distortions and have posted nothing with regards to their testing data. This thread was created to explore whether people can hear differences in CD vs "high-res." It got this long because people fundamentally thought there is no difference there. That assumption was rooted in believing what people say in forums as opposed to real data. Likewise the notion that golden ears don't exist comes from total lack of experience professionally. Ask any codec developer if golden ears exist and they would tell you 100% yes. How do they know? Because such golden ears test their technology everyday.

This is why I say these forum discussions have bizarre rules of their own. We dismiss value of professional experience as to position us, without that experience, as being just as much of an expert. Problem with that is that we find ourselves in such a thread where the limits of our knowledge and experience catches up to us. Where the very data we demand, has proven us wrong! Even with this mountain of data, we are in complete denial claiming once again that everyone hears the same.

You often quote the Dolby paper on audibility of jitter. Here is a graph from that listening test:



Compare listener 4 to listener 6. The former is able to detect jitter in that test at a level of roughly 5 nanoseconds. In sharp contrast, listener 6's threshold of hearing was 30 nanoseconds or 6 times higher. Clearly listener 2 is much more skilled in hearing such small non-linear distortions.

But wait, there is more! In that study they ran a screening session where they weeded out people that could not hear jitter. Had they included them, as is the case with all of these DBTs people throw around, the differential between best and worst would have been substantially higher.

While on this topic of jitter again , you had said in this thread that threshold of hearing for jitter would be measured in many microseconds. Yet listener 2 in the above test could hear jitter in single digit nanoseconds or billions of second. This is orders of magnitude lower than your conclusions. Therefore, your representations were misleading with respect to audibility of jitter then, yes?

Edit: can't spell right .

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

Last edited by amirm; 07-20-2014 at 06:48 AM.
amirm is online now  
post #2146 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 07:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,848
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 522
How can we determine if it was non linearities in the playback chain, like the PC, that was responsible for the audible differences?

"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 #2147 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 07:56 AM
Senior Member
 
stereoeditor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 341
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
This one is for Krabapple who got upset at me for saying that MP3 never achieves transparency even at its maximum data rate.
Krabapple was involved in a thread on Hydrogen Audio about 5 years ago, where I was being strenuously criticized for recommending Stereophile readers to use lossless rather than lossy compression. My point was that while MP3 and AAC at the higher bit rates might be sufficiently transparent with some recordings to satisfy a majority of listeners, you don't know ahead of ripping a recording if that will be true or not. In addition, what might be transparent to a particular listener now might not be as his listening abilities develop, or if he had learned what to listen for with lossy compressed music.

The only safe strategy to guarantee transparency and still reduce storage space was therefore to rip to a lossless format like ALAC or FLAC.

You would have I thought I was recommending people cut off a hand, so strong was the criticism on HA of what I felt to be sensible, practical advice. Especially as storage was now ridiculously cheap compared to how expensive it was when MP3 became popular and how much fatter download pipes had become.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Here is the result of testing Arny's file downsampled to 16/44 compared to MP3 version of the same at 320kbps:

=================
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/19 19:45:33

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling 16 44_01.mp3

19:45:33 : Test started.
19:46:21 : 01/01 50.0%
19:46:35 : 02/02 25.0%
19:46:49 : 02/03 50.0% << dog barked in my ear wanting to go out
19:47:03 : 03/04 31.3%
19:47:13 : 04/05 18.8%
19:47:27 : 05/06 10.9%
19:47:38 : 06/07 6.3%
19:47:46 : 07/08 3.5%
19:48:01 : 08/09 2.0%
19:48:19 : 09/10 1.1%
19:48:31 : 10/11 0.6%
19:48:45 : 11/12 0.3%
19:48:58 : 12/13 0.2%
19:49:11 : 13/14 0.1%
19:49:28 : 14/15 0.0%
19:49:52 : 15/16 0.0%
19:49:56 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 15/16 (0.0%)

Seems incontrovertible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Back to MP3, it simply does not achieve transparency for all content and all ears.
And that was the point I made on HA, to universal condemnation.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
stereoeditor is offline  
post #2148 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 08:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,848
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 522
The HA thread in question.

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/ind...howtopic=61839
krabapple likes this.

"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 #2149 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 09:16 AM
Newbie
 
onlyconnect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
This particular sample is recorded at a reasonably high level but so much of its energy is at high frequencies that are not heard well that extra volume may be required. You also have to be careful to not push volume so high that your electronics or speakers are pushed into clipping or nonlinearity.

The downsampling algorithm that was used is been around for well over a decade, is well known, is often used, and provides consistently high sonic performance. It has been reviewed by sites devoted to criticizing resampling programs, and performed in the top echelon. It performs very well in technical tests, and listening tests.
What is the algorithm, no need to be secretive :-)


The average RMS of the 44/14 sample is about -34 dB according to Audition but it is subjectively quieter than say a piece of classical music with the same average RMS because there is so much HF energy.


Tim
onlyconnect is offline  
post #2150 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 09:20 AM
Newbie
 
onlyconnect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Now, this could be because my high frequency sensitivity is shot . The spectrum of that track shows that its level keeps increasing as frequencies go up so if your hearing is much more intact than mine, you could have a different experience. It is something that I can't say because I don't hear it myself.
Thanks, it is indeed a "difficult" track which is why it is suitable for this test.


Tim
amirm likes this.
onlyconnect is offline  
post #2151 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 10:16 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 onlyconnect View Post
What is the algorithm, no need to be secretive :-)
He is using an old version of Adobe Audition called Cool Edit. Adobe bought the Syntrillium Software that developed it 10+ years ago. Prior to that there was a free version of Cool Edit but Audition is not free. I think this is the reason Arny is still using it.

It is a good resmapler though. You can compare it to others like Sox here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #2152 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 10:23 AM
Newbie
 
onlyconnect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
He is using an old version of Adobe Audition called Cool Edit. Adobe bought the Syntrillium Software that developed it 10+ years ago. Prior to that there was a free version of Cool Edit but Audition is not free. I think this is the reason Arny is still using it.

It is a good resmapler though. You can compare it to others like Sox here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/
Ah, that's good I have Audition too though I don't pretend to be expert on all the different resampling options.


That said, I got an odd result. I made my own downsample to 16/44 with all the options disabled, and then upsampled back to 24/96. I then inverted my downsample and mixed it with the original full band version. I get a perfect null for frequencies below c 20K.


However if I do the same with the supplied 16/44 sample (which I understand was used for the ABX) it doesn't null well at all. Maybe the two files are not perfectly synched?


Here are my graphs:


http://1drv.ms/1zUph0p


Tim
onlyconnect is offline  
post #2153 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 11:12 AM
Senior Member
 
stereoeditor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 341
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
Actually, I was thinking of this earlier thread, http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/ind...howtopic=71245 ,
speciflcally post 503 , where in answer to the question "in what way, precisely, does the lossy file 'not offer sufficient audio quality for serious music listening?' I wrote:

-------------------------------------------------
...Everyone's threshold is going to be different and perhaps more significantly, their threshold of defects will change with time. For example, when I was younger, I wasn't bothered by scrape flutter in affordable analog tape machines. Just as well, as that's all I could afford at that time. But over the years, I have become much less tolerant of it, presumably because I have learned to identify it, and that is something that can't be unlearned.

Hence my blanket recommendation to which you refer: lossless or uncompressed for "serious" listening, to which I would add archiving. Why not when hard drive capacity is now so cheap. And for portable listening, I personally use AAC at 320kbps and recommend that, even if it might be thought overkill. People are not obliged to follow my advice, of course, and they are free to make their own decision about where to make the trade-off between file size and bit rate. But I think of an email from a Stereophile reader who ripped all his CDs as 128kbps MP3s and disposed of the CDs. He is now dissatisfied with the sound of his music collection but can't do anything about improving it short of repurchasing the CDs.

PS: I always recommend to my readers that they keep their CDs, as inconvenient as that might be. They are the backup of last resort.
-----------------------------------------------
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
amirm likes this.
stereoeditor is offline  
post #2154 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 11:13 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 onlyconnect View Post
What is the algorithm, no need to be secretive :-)
Cool Edit Pro 2.1:

See the comparative tests of it here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/help.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlyconnect View Post
The average RMS of the 44/14 sample is about -34 dB according to Audition but it is subjectively quieter than say a piece of classical music with the same average RMS because there is so much HF energy.
Exactly, I couldn't have said it better. Iif you read this whole thread you will see that I tried to say exactly that any number of times. ;-)

It is basically very pathological stuff, and I've never seen a passage in regular musical recording that even comes close. It makes the hottest percussion I've ever seen in a regular musical recording look like a walk in the park. IME cymbal crashes are child's play in comparison.
arnyk is online now  
post #2155 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 11:25 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 stereoeditor View Post
Actually, I was thinking of this earlier thread, http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/ind...howtopic=71245 ,
speciflcally post 503 , where in answer to the question "in what way, precisely, does the lossy file 'not offer sufficient audio quality for serious music listening?' I wrote:
The above sorta skips over the OP for the thread which goes like this:

"We play my solid 256kbps VBR MP3 of "Heroes" off my iPod; it sounds like S#!t. Free of pops and crackles, yes, but completely lifeless, flat in every way. This is the detail that matters: Audiophiles are basically synesthesiacs. They "see" music in three-dimensional visual space. You close your eyes in Fremer's chair, and you can perceive a detailed 3D matrix of sound, with each element occupying its own special space in the air. It's crazy and I've never experienced anything like it."

Two words: sighted evaluation. It is well known that people doing evaluations of this kind are strongly prone towards false positives and that often means hearing exactly what they want to hear.

Even the best MP3 isn't a perfect transcription, and I don't think that any of the regulars on HA believe that it is. It seems that no matter how refined the perceptual coder, there is always some pathological piece of music somewhere that gets a tiny bit changed by perceptual coding.

That said, characterizing the sound of good modern coder-made 256k MP3s (maybe the author is still running MP3 software from the early 1990s) as sounding like XXit seems like a bit much.

Your typical audiophile publication seems to be based on the idea that their writers have superhuman powers of hearing, As soon as their staffs support their claims with a series of well-done listening tests, I'll be obliged to agree. AFAIK it hasn't happened in over 30 years. Note the rush of our local celebrity to post the results of his ABX testing... ;-)
arnyk is online now  
post #2156 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 11:54 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 onlyconnect View Post
Ah, that's good I have Audition too though I don't pretend to be expert on all the different resampling options.

That said, I got an odd result. I made my own downsample to 16/44 with all the options disabled, and then upsampled back to 24/96. I then inverted my downsample and mixed it with the original full band version. I get a perfect null for frequencies below c 20K.

However if I do the same with the supplied 16/44 sample (which I understand was used for the ABX) it doesn't null well at all. Maybe the two files are not perfectly synched?

Here are my graphs:

http://1drv.ms/1zUph0p

Tim
Looks like Arny just confirmed what I said about what software he used.

As to your analysis, I say it re-enforces what I said on page 1 of this thread. Arny, bless his heart, said that he can't hear any of these artifacts, nor has hearing ability above 8 Khz. Why on earth would we want to then trust his conversions to 44/16? Why not get the original file and not take chances of audibly degrading the files as has been shown?

I just can't understand why anyone would wake up in the morning, come to this thread and want to keep advocating the conversion to 44/16. It is wrong all around to do that. No benefit whatsoever exists in lower resolution file and good possibility of screwing up the sound as our double blind ABX tests in this thread show clearly. If Arny with all his might and "audio knowledge" can screw up the conversion, what hope is there for anyone else who doesn't spend a lifetime on forums learning about audio???

Give us the original files as mastered in the post production and be done with it. This argument really needs to be finished at this point. Anything else says we are not data driven and are dogmatic in our audio belief.

OK, I feel better now.
stereoeditor likes this.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
post #2157 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,660
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1567 Post(s)
Liked: 496
I'm ordering the new hi-res Beatles LPs.
NorthSky is offline  
post #2158 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 12:34 PM
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
Looks like Arny just confirmed what I said about what software he used.

As to your analysis, I say it re-enforces what I said on page 1 of this thread. Arny, bless his heart, said that he can't hear any of these artifacts, nor has hearing ability above 8 Khz. Why on earth would we want to then trust his conversions to 44/16? Why not get the original file and not take chances of audibly degrading the files as has been shown?

I just can't understand why anyone would wake up in the morning, come to this thread and want to keep advocating the conversion to 44/16. It is wrong all around to do that. No benefit whatsoever exists in lower resolution file and good possibility of screwing up the sound as our double blind ABX tests in this thread show clearly. If Arny with all his might and "audio knowledge" can screw up the conversion, what hope is there for anyone else who doesn't spend a lifetime on forums learning about audio???

Give us the original files as mastered in the post production and be done with it. This argument really needs to be finished at this point. Anything else says we are not data driven and are dogmatic in our audio belief.

OK, I feel better now.
The argument is finished: 16/44 is here to stay.
koturban is offline  
post #2159 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,090
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked: 375
No it's not.

I'll be back later...


1.5RQ > digits > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest
RayDunzl is offline  
post #2160 of 2920 Old 07-20-2014, 01:35 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
Someone linked to remarkably similar results to the experiment here on WBF Forum. Here is the original post:

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/ind...t=#entry713014

----------
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.0.3
2010/06/07 18:25:51

File A: C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Christian\Desktop\16-441to24-96.wav
File B: C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Christian\Desktop\24-96.wav

18:25:51 : Test started.
18:26:44 : 01/01 50.0%
18:27:09 : 02/02 25.0%
18:27:26 : 03/03 12.5%
18:27:44 : 04/04 6.3%
18:28:00 : 05/05 3.1%
18:28:21 : 06/06 1.6%
18:28:38 : 07/07 0.8%
18:28:52 : 08/08 0.4%
18:29:06 : 09/09 0.2%
18:29:17 : 10/10 0.1%
18:29:33 : 11/11 0.0%
18:29:46 : 12/12 0.0%
18:30:03 : 13/13 0.0%
18:30:26 : 14/14 0.0%
18:30:42 : 15/15 0.0%
18:31:04 : 16/16 0.0%
18:31:08 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 16/16 (0.0%)


I was so surprised to see Arny in that thread and hence having knowledge of other positive results of the nature we have had in this thread..

Looks like his testing of 96/24 against 44/16 were done using speakers:"My hearing tops at about 17 kHz. Still I can hear pretty clear difference over a pair of Elac FS 607 X-Jet speakers, which are rated for 28-50000Hz (IEC 268-5)"

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is online now  
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