A Global Depiction of Jitter - The Big Picture! - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 09:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,026
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 697 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The above is just another manifestation of what seems like Numerically Induced Mania or NIM.

What is more important, good sound or good numbers?
You are yet again trying to change topics Arny. As I just noted, we are in a *technical* topic. It is about extracting clock from the source device. Some comment was made about how it works and I have responded with how the systems really work. The graph that you talk about is a measurement that backs the explanation of the circuit.

If we don't understand the circuit and all we care about is "how it sounds" then we should not throw technical terms around hoping it terminates the audibility discussions by implying that the problem doesn't exist at design level. The measurements show that tactic to have no merit. There are distinct differences in performance of digital audio reception and anyone who says there isn't as a matter of system design, should be prepared to back that comment with design data, not "what is more important, good sound or good numbers."

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 10:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Sounds like Amir is more interested in what used to be called "specmanship" than in what's actually audible.
RobertR is offline  
post #123 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 10:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,301
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 689 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Sounds like Amir is more interested in what used to be called "specmanship" than in what's actually audible.

Precisely. I helped develop ABX almost 40 years ago in an attempt to make audio engineering more than just a mad chase after just impressive-looking numbers.
arnyk is online now  
post #124 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 10:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,026
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 697 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Sounds like Amir is more interested in what used to be called "specmanship" than in what's actually audible.
Well, if you want to describe me, you should say I am interested in correct depiction of how audio systems *work*. It is perfectly fine to say these things are not audible to you. I don't care much about what you believe. My interest is proper depiction of how audio systems perform. Say something wrong there and as you see from thread to thread, you will hear me speak out. This is the "theory" part of the forum. If you are not interested in theory of how our equipment works, then you are in the wrong subforum.

You may think I am doing damage to our "objectivity" cause. It is actually the opposite. I am trying to save us from embarrassment when we claim such things as "rebuffering and clock generation do away with jitter" and an audio designer hears it and puts you in your place. Sure, 99.99% of the time the recipient is a non-engineer who gets scared of those terms, thinking you know more than he does and won't counter. But there are other times, like the situation here, where you will be called to justify your claim. And lacking that, look really bad that we didn't present the true picture of the technology. That we spun it in our favor rather that being impartial and "objective" in our conduct.

Failing the technical challenge, we must not follow with, and I hope Arnyh forgives me for saying so, that the top experts in audio who design DACs for a living, are somehow salespeople whose authoritative writing is a sales pitch. We talk about how we are men of science. Men of science talk about science, not people. And that is unfortunately what you are doing. Instead of discussing the topic of the thread, you are choosing to discuss me. That is not science. That is politics.

I like to know what you get out of someone not correcting technical statements here. Why is it to so torturous to hear that message? Don't we want to learn how our audio systems really work as opposed to taking the word of someone on a forum who doesn't know what an FPGA is and references a hobby site as back up to their argument???

What is the crime in seeing real measurements instead of hand waving the performance of your audio products? That someone will take this and run with it? Sure, they can. And they should. What is fair is fair. If some part of audio equipment is poorly designed, we need to shine light on it so that manufacturers fix them. All of this protesting for sake of winning some online argument clouds that message and gets us stuck with these poor design into the future.

Ultimately it seems that we want a total surrender. I say HDMI distortion is "likely not audible" and that is not good enough. Worse yet, you go on to say I am not interested in "what's actually audible." I am interested in what is audible and that starts with correct assumptions of how the audio system works. If you don't have that foundation, you won't know how to construct the right tests to see if something is or is not audible.

Please allow me to quote one of the most fair objectivist members on this forum who had this to say in my very first back and forth on AVS with Arny:
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.

I rest may case smile.gif.
David Susilo likes this.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #125 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 11:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Jon Middleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I am happy to lend support to that just the same smile.gif.

There is a place and time for common sense remarks but....

your posts need not apply. Personally, I think common sense should always apply when you discuss audio gear. If not, you risk making foolish purchasing decisions.
Jon Middleton is offline  
post #126 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 11:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,301
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 689 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Sounds like Amir is more interested in what used to be called "specmanship" than in what's actually audible.
Well, if you want to describe me, you should say I am interested in correct depiction of how audio systems *work*.

The executive summary of the answer to that interest is often "Very well and without audible fault".
Quote:
It is perfectly fine to say these things are not audible to you.

IMO it is perfectly fine to recognize that there are many things that may be depictable and measurable but not audible to any living human without singling out any particular person and trying to make an example of them.
RobertR likes this.
arnyk is online now  
post #127 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 11:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Well, if you want to describe me, you should say I am interested in correct depiction of how audio systems *work*.
No, you're more interested in snowing people with truckloads of technical jargon in an attempt to get people to pay attention to you, the objective being making people think "golly gee, Amir sounds so smart, maybe I SHOULD be worried about jitter when he says I should. Never MIND that he never seems to cite any DBTs showing that people can actually hear this stuff, and never MIND that he sells the stuff that he cites as being "better" in this regard." And spare me the attempt at a "testimonial". Testimonials mean nothing with respect to how things actually sound.
Ratman and Tack like this.
RobertR is offline  
post #128 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 11:32 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
craig john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 10,287
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I rest may case smile.gif.

If only....

rolleyes.gif

Lombardi said it:
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

My System

craig john is offline  
post #129 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 11:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,026
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 697 Post(s)
Liked: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by craig john View Post

If only....

rolleyes.gif
Guilty as charged. smile.gif

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #130 of 130 Old 06-07-2014, 01:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,301
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 689 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Just to get things back on track, here is your opportunity to hear HDMI jitter.

Follow this link by pasting it into your web browser:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0ov07gu5azijtfz/AAD5acmrMz2o9G4MUCm_6kMPa


You should be able download these 7 files:



The titles pretty well tell the story. Each file starts out with a loud test tone, and is followed by a musical selection from Joni Mitchell.

These files are designed to be listened to and/or ABXed in Foobar2000. One of the nifty features of Foobar is that it allows you to select which parts of a music file you can listen to, so you can listen to the test tone or the music separately.

In the file entitled "30 Hz jitter severe level .3.flac" the test tone should sound like someone is gargling, and so should Joni That's what Zwicker and Fastl call "roughness".

As you go down the sequence of files from .3 to 0.015, the gargling (due to audible jitter) should go away at some point.

If you can prove that you can reliably distinguish any of the other files from the file with no jitter 12/16 trials using the ABX Comparator in FooBar2000 (both foobar and the comparator need to be downloaded and installed from here http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx and here: http://www.foobar2000.org/?page=Download - they are free), then post the test log and your experiences here.
arnyk is online now  
Reply 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