Debate Thread: Scott's Hi-res Audio Test - Page 76 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 734Likes
 
Thread Tools
post #2251 of 2920 Old 07-21-2014, 09:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 4,622
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1995 Post(s)
Liked: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
I wanted to hear Frozen not keys jangling.

--- Chu, your sense of humor is very sharp, I like it a lot.
NorthSky is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2252 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 12:09 AM
Member
 
rufus13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Soviet of Portlandia
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
Hyperbole at best, utter audiophile bosh at worst. Not all differences matter.
ECM pod test set. All adjustments interact in the most frustrating possible way. 16KV in case you get sloppy.
Lots of other places, too. Especially young women.
rufus13 is offline  
post #2253 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 12:19 AM
Member
 
rufus13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Soviet of Portlandia
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
.
Earl Geddes makes me want to build a funny-looking room with double-sloped walls and 3 subwoofers.
rufus13 is offline  
post #2254 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 03:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
OK, so more than one person is confused about the discussion. So let me review.

Scott had set out to test whether people can hear the difference between originally recorded/mastered 24/96 Khz and conversion of it to CD's 16-bit/44.1 Khz. After gathering a ton of input and modifying the original test, they put out the final set of files. I listened to them using the recommended foobar tool and these were my results:
Summarizing, I managed to consistently tell all three files apart from their downsampled 44.1 Khz/16 bit versions.

It didn't stop there. By chance Arny also put out a similar test which he positioned as being difficult (impossible?) to tell apart. These are the results of my listening tests again:

As you see, this is a perfect score when it comes to finding the difference between the original 96 Khz and down sampling to 44.1 and 32 Khz.


Not only that, but others managed to duplicate the same results for a subset of these.

These are three possibilities for these results:

1. DBT ABX testing is flawed and generates false positive results.

2. DBT ABX testing is proper and it has shown that we can indeed hear conversion of 24-bit/96 Khz to 16/44.1 as presented to us.

3. No one can really hear these differences except for those with an implant by aliens against their will.

Personally I would have opted for option #3 but no one wants to go there although I think I have Chu almost convinced.
No there is a fourth possibility that seems to have somehow slipped through the cracks.

The above results are not the least bit remarkable if the monitoring system is less than audibly linear over the frequency range of the program material that is involved.

A listening test was developed to test any monitoring system for linearity in the range from 20 KHz to 48 Khz more or less. It was made available in this thread yesterday morning.

Only one person has tried this test, and analysis of his results are being withheld from publication pending other relevant people attempting to use it. This person's name is not Amir. Amir has some unfinished homework!

Any listening test results using an untested monitoring system are potentially bogus.
Frank Derks and tubetwister like this.
arnyk is offline  
post #2255 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 03:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus13 View Post
Earl Geddes makes me want to build a funny-looking room with double-sloped walls and 3 subwoofers.
The funny looking part can be concealed. The rest might work out quite well.
arnyk is offline  
post #2256 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 05:06 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
If that is how they were produced, of course yes. Did you not get my point?
Of course, I did. You're chasing the hi-res dragon.

Last edited by koturban; 07-22-2014 at 07:07 AM.
koturban is online now  
post #2257 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 06:24 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,344
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1696 Post(s)
Liked: 3042
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
No there is a fourth possibility that seems to have somehow slipped through the cracks.

The above results are not the least bit remarkable if the monitoring system is less than audibly linear over the frequency range of the program material that is involved.

A listening test was developed to test any monitoring system for linearity in the range from 20 KHz to 48 Khz more or less. It was made available in this thread yesterday morning.

Only one person has tried this test, and analysis of his results are being withheld from publication pending other relevant people attempting to use it. This person's name is not Amir. Amir has some unfinished homework!

Any listening test results using an untested monitoring system are potentially bogus.
Fwiw, I decided to strip away everything but the ultrasonic content from the 24/96 key jangling file and play just that. While the tones you added at the end do create audible artifacts (presumably because they are set to 100% gain), the ultrasonic content in the key jangling section—when played in isolation—does not produce any detectable audible artifacts, on either of my systems.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #2258 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 07:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
OK, here's my first shot at an IM test.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5xk18jgqmu...st%20tones.zip

There are two files in the zip file - both 2496, both containing the usual keys jangling sound, but at the end are 4 seconds of test tones.

(1) Using the FOOBAR2000 facilities for listening to only part of a file, listen to the usual keys jangling sound and ABX to obtain your usual accurate detection.

(2) Now move on to listening to just the last 4 seconds of the files. The contents of the last 4 seconds of the file should sound like a -30 dB 4 KHz tone (not at all ear splitting), followed by a click, 1 second of silence, a click, 1 second of silence, a click, 1 second of silence, a click and end, whether you listen to the 2496 or the 1644 version. Please report what you hear for both files. Do not change your volume control between the keys jangling ABX listening and an the test tone listening. You do not need to ABX the test tone segments, just do sighted listening and report your subjective impressions.

In addition, for your listening pleasure:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9nuvojqahj...rk%20fixed.zip

Contains Ethan's Soundblaster generations file with the ca. 0.4 dB level mismatch (probably audible) corrected.
Here is what I get for the last 4 seconds:


Oppo 105D - Headphone :
44k file testtone - soft click -silence -loud click - silence - soft click
96k file testtone - soft-click -4kHz +noise* - loud click - silence - softclick


*Noisy rough sounding 4kHz pitch tone.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oppo 105D - Hdmi2spdiff -> Denon AVC A1SE +upgrade -> Power Amps -> Speakers (Thiel CS3.7)
44k file testtone - no click -silence -loud click - silence - soft click
96k file testtone - very soft click - low level 4kHz tone*- loud click - silence - soft click


*very faint fairly clean sounding 4kHz tone only observed on axis of the tweeter ( 1 or 2 feet) but nothing off axis on the listening position (9..10 feet)
Volume setting is at "-9dB" This is almost live concert level with music content.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SoundBlaster Xfi -> Dell Monitor soundbar speakers
44k file testtone - soft click -noise -loud click - silence - soft click
96k file testtone - soft-click - 4kHz + noise - loud click - silence - softclick


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


SoundBlaster Xfi -> Dell Monitor soundbar headphone output using AKG K271studio
44k file testtone - soft click -silence -loud click - silence - soft click
96k file testtone - soft-click -silence - loud click - silence - soft click


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

Last edited by Frank Derks; 07-22-2014 at 08:02 AM.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #2259 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 08:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Fwiw, I decided to strip away everything but the ultrasonic content from the 24/96 key jangling file and play just that. While the tones you added at the end do create audible artifacts (presumably because they are set to 100% gain), the ultrasonic content in the key jangling section—when played in isolation—does not produce any detectable audible artifacts, on either of my systems.
I presume this means you heard nothing, which suggests that what people are hearing is an artifact of how the files were made, not the actual extra bandwidth of 96 kHz SR. Otherwise one must propose that the ultrasonic content is only 'effective' when in conjunction with 0-20kHz content. Suggesting that it is actually producing interaction artifacts in the audible band.


The converse experiment might be worth doing: try comparing a 'stripped' 24/96 file (24/96 minus its ultrasonic content) to the 16/44 in an ABX.
krabapple is offline  
post #2260 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 08:37 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,373
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
No there is a fourth possibility that seems to have somehow slipped through the cracks.

The above results are not the least bit remarkable if the monitoring system is less than audibly linear over the frequency range of the program material that is involved.
Well, let's explore that. This is one of the tests you had us run:

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Band and resolution limited to 44/16:



Band and resolution limited to 32/16:



Listen away guys! If you can't hear a difference between these files, hang it up...
And my test results of the same:

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
And here are my results comparing 32 Khz sampling to 44 Khz. A test which I had run before with the same outcome:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/21 08:47:19

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 3216 2496.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 4416 2496.wav

08:47:19 : Test started.
08:47:38 : 01/01 50.0%
08:47:47 : 02/02 25.0%
08:47:57 : 03/03 12.5%
08:48:06 : 04/04 6.3%
08:48:15 : 05/05 3.1%
08:48:27 : 06/06 1.6%
08:48:33 : 07/07 0.8%
08:48:41 : 08/08 0.4%
08:48:50 : 09/09 0.2%
08:48:59 : 10/10 0.1%
08:49:14 : 11/11 0.0%
08:49:18 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 11/11 (0.0%)


As I noted in my response to Mark, I don't see how Arny's hypothesis has merit. Arny, do you hear these differences and still believe it is "IM distortion?"
Can you explain your theory in the context of this test?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arny
A listening test was developed to test any monitoring system for linearity in the range from 20 KHz to 48 Khz more or less. It was made available in this thread yesterday morning.
There is no 48 Khz involved in the above listening test Arny. Your higher resolution file is 44 Khz sampling for a bandwidth of just 22.05 Khz, not 48 Khz. So whatever theory you have does not apply to above test, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arny
Only one person has tried this test, and analysis of his results are being withheld from publication pending other relevant people attempting to use it. This person's name is not Amir. Amir has some unfinished homework!
No I don't Arny. This better not be just about me. You have not post your own results for this test. You have shown no measurements of the "IM distortion" you said you were running. And I ran the test you proposed in the other thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Just to close this chapter anyway, I ran this test that Arny proposed there: "another, potentially safer test signal would be white or pink noise high pass filtered at 22 KHz. If there is excess nonlinear distoriton in your system you'll hear noise in the normal audio band. "

I created a blank file at 96 Khz/24-bit and filled it with white noise. I then high-pass filtered it at 24 Khz. At 22 Khz even with maximum filter order, it would still preserve spectrum below 20 Khz. I then played this. I hear nothing using my Shure IEM. Not only that, our two dogs who can hear and recognize sounds thousand times better than any of us, would not react whatsoever from 2 foot distance. Playing the white noise prior to filtering made both of them jump.

So there, you have both dog and human evidence that Arny's hypothesis doesn't hold.
You can't keep throwing challenges after challenges out there where you don't hear the differences and we do. As I said, it is illogical to assume that you can create tests for artifacts you can't hear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arny
Any listening test results using an untested monitoring system are potentially bogus.
Ah, so now there is this much difference in our playback systems as to show differences between high-res and CD? Haven't we completely lost the larger argument then?

Is Meyer and Moran test bogus? They didn't run your special tests, right?

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #2261 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
As usual Amir, you didn't get the point of Arny's latest challenge. And very cheap shot at avoiding the latest challenge giving as reason that Arny himself can't hear his own test.


All your ABX results are very suspicious because most likely you had lot's of intermodulation distortion in your setup, help from the dogs or hooked up the AP analyzer.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #2262 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
In Scott's first test I succeeded in recognizing the hires files.
Most likely due to the 0.2dB difference and using Oppo plus headphones combo that turn out to have IM

In Scott's seconds test I selected the lo res files instead because they sounded slightly cleaner. No 0.2 dB difference anymore.


Interesting is that I failed to ABX successfully when using the PC soundcard with monitor soundbar outputting to headphones.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #2263 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
I presume this means you heard nothing, which suggests that what people are hearing is an artifact of how the files were made, not the actual extra bandwidth of 96 kHz SR.
Not so. The test files have been tested thoroughly and analyzed thoroughly, and perform as desired. We have had test results that clearly indicate audible IM and other test reports that don't indicate audible IM which is already pretty good indication that the test is doing something right. The equipment that is demonstrating audible IM in some cases surprises me and in other cases is no surprise at all.

One tip. If there is an indication of audible IM try just turning the volume down a few dB. It often goes away. As long as you use the lower setting consistently, your equipment is OK at that lowered volume setting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
Otherwise one must propose that the ultrasonic content is only 'effective' when in conjunction with 0-20kHz content. Suggesting that it is actually producing interaction artifacts in the audible band.
The ultrasonic content and the sonic content must interact in the monitoring chain if any interaction is possible (IOW IM is present) since both are present and are amplified and/or transduced concurrently in the same equipment.

An ideal monitoring chain causes no interaction between the various signals being amplified concurrently. That is one part of the formal definition of linear. - there is no interaction. The actual interaction in the test signals is 130+ dB down.


Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
The converse experiment might be worth doing: try comparing a 'stripped' 24/96 file (24/96 minus its ultrasonic content) to the 16/44 in an ABX.
Those two files have to be identical +/- any odd artifacts of the procedures used to strip the ultrasonic content. I already fielded a complaint about this, and it was due to improper techniques being used (no dither when dither should have been added) to do the stripping by the complainant.


Remember that if you remove the subsonic content you cut the file's peak amplitude in about half. That means that the monitoring chain is receiving signficantly less stress. Note that I just recomended reducing IM by reducing the stress on the monitoring chain.

Case in point: One of my monitoring systems produces audible IM as I would like to use it, but that is vastly reduced if I back the volume off about 3 dB. I reduce the stress on the monitoring chain and that simple fact can clean it up splendidly. This is one reason why I am so insistent about running the sound tests at the indentical volume setting as the IM tests.
arnyk is offline  
post #2264 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,964
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 595
Former AES president has occasionally been referenced and quoted here when it comes to the justification for high rez. In a shameless appeal to authority, I am curious if any of the playback systems employed by the sundry listeners conform to Fielder's recommendations?

"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 #2265 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:48 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,373
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post
As usual Amir, you didn't get the point of Arny's latest challenge.
No one said I am that smart .

Quote:
Originally Posted by frank
All your ABX results are very suspicious because most likely you had lot's of intermodulation distortion in your setup, help from the dogs or hooked up the AP analyzer.
You are giving me way too much credit as I had to deploy all three measures and then some to hear the differences. To be clear, I had two dogs co-listening with me, not just one. I am hoping to borrow a second AP as the tests get harder.

For now, I am at our vacation house with dogs but no AP. I do have a PC connected using HDMI to my Pioneer SC63 AVR driving Revel speakers in a large and highly reverberant living room. This is what I got:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/22 08:31:52

File A: C:\Users\I5 Media Center 7\Desktop\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 4416 2496.wav
File B: C:\Users\I5 Media Center 7\Desktop\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 3216 2496.wav

08:31:52 : Test started.
08:32:24 : 00/01 100.0% <--- Confused dogs licking my face for hearing a difference
08:32:49 : 01/02 75.0%
08:33:04 : 01/03 87.5% <--- Bird flew by the window and the dogs found that more interesting than keys jingling
08:33:37 : 02/04 68.8%
08:33:47 : 03/05 50.0%
08:33:56 : 04/06 34.4%
08:34:09 : 05/07 22.7%
08:34:19 : 06/08 14.5%
08:34:32 : 07/09 9.0%
08:34:44 : 08/10 5.5%
08:34:53 : 09/11 3.3%
08:34:58 : 10/12 1.9%
08:35:09 : 11/13 1.1%
08:35:18 : 12/14 0.6%
08:35:27 : 13/15 0.4%
08:35:34 : 14/16 0.2%
08:35:44 : 15/17 0.1%
08:35:55 : 16/18 0.1%
08:36:14 : 17/19 0.0%
08:36:29 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 17/19 (0.0%)


This cost me a ton of treats for the dogs. Usually I give them one carrot but since we had to go to almost 20 runs, they demanded two! I need to figure out how to pass these tests without them before going broke....

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #2266 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:52 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,373
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
Former AES president has occasionally been referenced and quoted here when it comes to the justification for high rez. In a shameless appeal to authority, I am curious if any of the playback systems employed by the sundry listeners conform to Fielder's recommendations?
With or without dogs Chu?

I vote with:


Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #2267 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
When I lowered the volume on the Oppo Headphone combo from 100 to 70 the IM spl lowered gradually.


The same headphone didn't had any IM through the soundcard and the soundbar headphone amplifier.


This was very surprising as I suspected the opposite to be true.


The IM from the soundbar under the monitor over the speakers sounded the most dirtiest and was the loudest in comparison to the 4k test tone.


The IM I got in the main system had the lowest level in comparison to the 4k test tone and was almost a clean sounding 4kHz pitch. But only on the tweeter axis, off axis no IM 4kHz pitch could be observed.
I assume the IM is from the dome tweeter because it was beaming. A 4kHz pitch IM from the amplifier should have a wider dispersion. Just as the 4kHz test tone had,
Frank Derks is offline  
post #2268 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 10:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
No one said I am that smart .


You are giving me way too much credit as I had to deploy all three measures and then some to hear the differences. To be clear, I had two dogs co-listening with me, not just one. I am hoping to borrow a second AP as the tests get harder.

For now, I am at our vacation house with dogs but no AP. I do have a PC connected using HDMI to my Pioneer SC63 AVR driving Revel speakers in a large and highly reverberant living room. This is what I got:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/22 08:31:52

File A: C:\Users\I5 Media Center 7\Desktop\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 4416 2496.wav
File B: C:\Users\I5 Media Center 7\Desktop\Arnys Filter Test\keys jangling band resolution limited 3216 2496.wav

08:31:52 : Test started.
08:32:24 : 00/01 100.0% <--- Confused dogs licking my face for hearing a difference
08:32:49 : 01/02 75.0%
08:33:04 : 01/03 87.5% <--- Bird flew by the window and the dogs found that more interesting than keys jingling
08:33:37 : 02/04 68.8%
08:33:47 : 03/05 50.0%
08:33:56 : 04/06 34.4%
08:34:09 : 05/07 22.7%
08:34:19 : 06/08 14.5%
08:34:32 : 07/09 9.0%
08:34:44 : 08/10 5.5%
08:34:53 : 09/11 3.3%
08:34:58 : 10/12 1.9%
08:35:09 : 11/13 1.1%
08:35:18 : 12/14 0.6%
08:35:27 : 13/15 0.4%
08:35:34 : 14/16 0.2%
08:35:44 : 15/17 0.1%
08:35:55 : 16/18 0.1%
08:36:14 : 17/19 0.0%
08:36:29 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 17/19 (0.0%)

This cost me a ton of treats for the dogs. Usually I give them one carrot but since we had to go to almost 20 runs, they demanded two! I need to figure out how to pass these tests without them before going broke....
There was supposed to be a smiley in the post but the forum software doesn't insert the when using the button


In three out of four listening chains I tested with the IM test file from Arny I got IM In each the resulting IM is having its own distinct sound characteristic at different spl levels in comparison to the 4kHz test tone.

Last edited by Frank Derks; 07-22-2014 at 10:07 AM.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #2269 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 10:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,964
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 595
FWIW, Amir, I am convinced that you as well as some others were able to reliably detect a difference. At this point, I'm unclear why that was, which of course has led various possibilities which may have nothing or everything to do with the increased resolution. I hope you and others don't take it personally and can accept that being thorough only helps to come to a deeper understanding.

I take it that the Washington fires are not threatening to where you are.

My son's dog, a 45 lb. pit does not enjoy carrot sticks but last Monday she nailed a woodchuck that strayed a little too far from its hole. So she's now gotten 3 woodchucks and two squirrels.
RichB and skater2 like 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 #2270 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post
FWIW, Amir, I am convinced that you as well as some others were able to reliably detect a difference. At this point, I'm unclear why that was, which of course has led various possibilities which may have nothing or everything to do with the increased resolution. I hope you and others don't take it personally and can accept that being thorough only helps to come to a deeper understanding.

I take it that the Washington fires are not threatening to where you are.

My son's dog, a 45 lb. pit does not enjoy carrot sticks but last Monday she nailed a woodchuck that strayed a little too far from its hole. So she's now gotten 3 woodchucks and two squirrels.
I agree and it would be great if Sean Olive took this on to research further. Since quite a few mfg. are putting out new products for Hi-Rez audio, a published study by Dr. Olive would be great.

Last edited by Randy Bessinger; 07-22-2014 at 11:16 AM.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #2271 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Fwiw, I decided to strip away everything but the ultrasonic content from the 24/96 key jangling file and play just that. While the tones you added at the end do create audible artifacts (presumably because they are set to 100% gain), the ultrasonic content in the key jangling section—when played in isolation—does not produce any detectable audible artifacts, on either of my systems.
Have you tried the IM distortion tests that Arny proposed and Frank Derks used to identify potential IM issues in his setups?
krabapple is offline  
post #2272 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post
I agree and it would be great if Sean Olive took this on to research further. Since quite a few mfg. are putting out new products for Hi-Rez audio, a published study by Dr. Olive would be great.
I doubt Dr. Olive is much interested in this issue -- his bailiwick is user preference for transducers, devices which definitely display audible difference, far more readibly audible than the sorts of minute artifacts being dissected here.

Last edited by krabapple; 07-22-2014 at 11:22 AM.
krabapple is offline  
post #2273 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:37 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,344
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1696 Post(s)
Liked: 3042
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
I doubt Dr. Olive is much interested in this issue -- his bailiwick is user preference for transducers, devices which definitely display audible difference, far more readibly audible than the sorts of minute artifacts being dissected here.
You can say that again...

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #2274 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by koturban View Post
If there were 96 bit/ 384khz recordings being made, you'd be clamoring for those too.
When dancing men can reliably tell a competent (needn't be 'perfect', though certainly the tools for making it as good as can get, are not hard to find) 96/24-->44/16 conversion of music at 16 trials with a p<0.5 when they're just ABXing it at normal levels, and not scrutinizing it on a second-by-second basis to find the 'tell', with someone else proctoring the test (in case the dancing man tries some *tricky moves*), THEN I might take 'hi rez' proponents seriously when they report - as they have , OVER AND OVER AND OVER for over a decade now -- that replacing the Redbook version of a tune with the high-rez version immediately 'lifts the veil', scatters the clouds, and makes tulips grow in their gardens. aka "Even my waifu could hear it!"


And btw, what's funny here is that one of the critiques certain dancing men on the internets have made of Meyer & Moran was to question the competence of their downconversion of hi-rez to redbook. In *THAT* critique, conversion leads to *masking* of the 'real' audible differences between the two.
krabapple is offline  
post #2275 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
I doubt Dr. Olive is much interested in this issue -- his bailiwick is user preference for transducers, devices which definitely display audible difference, far more readibly audible than the sorts of minute artifacts being dissected here.
Point taken as preference does seem his main field of work and this test was a test of whether there was an audible difference and not one of preference (much less if one would pay extra for the Hi-Rez version).

Last edited by Randy Bessinger; 07-22-2014 at 12:05 PM.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #2276 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
You can say that again...

Of course, any mfr, Harman included, could reap huge brownie points if they simply published results in a reputable journal showing that people can hear improvement wholly attributable to 'high rez', during normal listening to normal musical signals at normal levels, without needing special training or test signals or special gear other than DACs that reliably output the true formats.

In other words, if they supported the marketing claims of the biz that has been hawking high rez, as well as the numerous and fervent testimonies of audio nirvana from the true believers in high rez (in print, online) , for more than a decade now.

Never, ever has such a report appeared. You'd think if high-rez made such an obvious improvement, it would be a breeze to produce such definitive data. Adding training, test signals, top gear, etc, should only make it easier still.

But no.

Nuthin'.

Not from Sony, not from Phillips, not from Meridian. Nor from Madrona, though I daresay the future is long and there is much dancing still to do.

Last edited by krabapple; 07-22-2014 at 12:00 PM.
krabapple is offline  
post #2277 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 12:35 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,373
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
When dancing men ...
Now you are questioning my dancing? What is wrong with this:



Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
....can reliably tell a competent (needn't be 'perfect', though certainly the tools for making it as good as can get, are not hard to find) 96/24-->44/16 conversion of music ...
So we are back to Arny not being competent to perform this conversion? And with no data whatsoever presented? I post his spectrum charts for 32 Khz and 44 Khz. How about you telling us what the problem is in those conversions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
...at 16 trials with a p<0.5 when they're just ABXing it at normal levels
Average RMS level of Arny's file is -35 db. That is a very quiet track. You don't know what level we all used to listen but if we had turned up the volume, that would be justified given how quiet this is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
..., and not scrutinizing it on a second-by-second basis to find the 'tell'
Oh? So you would be advocating that the buttons in foobar2000 ABX that let you select a segment be removed?



How about we put our heads in the sand and listen?

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
, with someone else proctoring the test (in case the dancing man tries some *tricky moves*),
tricky moves? Is that a scientific term? How do you perform tricky moves with a computer at the other end?

Our position from here on is that people have to use a human proctor and computer generated ABX is not proper?

I searched for your name and foobar ABX and this showed up immediately:
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post
If you use a PC, you can download a free player called foobar2000, which comes with an ABX comparison tool. It''s a great way to test for audible difference between files on your own.
How did it go from a great way to find audible differences to needing a person to avoid "tricky moves?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
... THEN I might take 'hi rez' proponents seriously
Ah, so the world cares whether you personally do or do not take it seriously? I think not. No one cares if I take it seriously or not either. What they care is data. On that front, and in this post, you have not presented any. Where are the results of your listening tests?

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
when they report - as they have , OVER AND OVER AND OVER for over a decade now -- that replacing the Redbook version of a tune with the high-rez version immediately 'lifts the veil', scatters the clouds, and makes tulips grow in their gardens. aka "Even my waifu could hear it!"
Hey, if my dogs could hear it, then your entire case is busted. Worry not about people who are not here. Worry instead that the data that was supposed to be impossible to get -- folks telling differences in "DBT ABX" -- are heard by believers and non-believers. Forever from now on you need new talking points. The old ones are busted to pieces. Cows came home. Oceans parted. Hell froze over. And we got DBTs saying small differences are audible to some people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krab
And btw, what's funny here is that one of the critiques certain dancing men on the internets have made of Meyer & Moran was to question the competence of their downconversion of hi-rez to redbook. In *THAT* critique, conversion leads to *masking* of the 'real' audible differences between the two.
I can't understand your English so not sure what to say other than my dogs hear the differences and if you can't, you have serious problems when it comes to your hearing and audio in general! Live with that.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #2278 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,338
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 67
So the results of this test are going to be published? I was hoping at best to see Scott and Mark give us the results in the test thread. To be honest, it seems to me this thread has run its course except for bragging rights (which I didn't even know was the purpose of the test).
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #2279 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 01:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
andyc56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 671
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

Never, ever has such a report appeared. You'd think if high-rez made such an obvious improvement, it would be a breeze to produce such definitive data. Adding training, test signals, top gear, etc, should only make it easier still.

But no.

Nuthin'.

Not from Sony, not from Phillips, not from Meridian. Nor from Madrona, though I daresay the future is long and there is much dancing still to do.
And the beat goes on...

krabapple and Randy Bessinger like this.
andyc56 is offline  
post #2280 of 2920 Old 07-22-2014, 01:43 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,644
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked: 314
Nah! Stop!


Randy Bessinger likes this.

Last edited by Ratman; 07-22-2014 at 01:50 PM.
Ratman is online now  
Closed Thread Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

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