Why 24/192 is a bad idea?

[arnyk]

Same test as you did - downloaded unidentified files & no contact with me until a PM of results.

More details, please.

How many people have responded in any way?

 

[jkeny]

More details, please.

How many people have responded in any way?

There are three types of files in the download link I gave you - untouched file, -39dB pre-echo 20 samples prior to music & -39dB pre-echo 60 samples prior to music.
The 20 sample pre-echo is more difficult to hear than the 60 sample.

The respondents below were only listening to the 20 sample files. - a much more difficult test
I can just identify the 60 samples file when played back through my laptop but I know what to listen for - I've been trained . None of the original listeners were trained!
Some didn't hear any differences - usually down to less resolving systems
12 listened & 10 identified the files correctly (without peeking)

Comments like "Reverb in File?? hit me right away.........."
"File? has a leaner, faster and more direct sound, exspecially on the rim shot.

File?? has bigger, rounder bass on the drum, the rim shot sounds slower and doesn't stand out as much."

But why believe me - maybe others here want to listen too? Beware, a laptop's in-built audio will not reveal any differences

 

[Ethan Winer]

There are three types of files in the download link I gave you - untouched file, -39dB pre-echo 20 samples prior to music & -39dB pre-echo 60 samples prior to music.

It would have helped if you explained that earlier. Or if you even explained anything. All you said was download the files and tell me what you hear. I saw no visual evidence of pre-echo in the waveforms, though of course I wasn't looking for that.

What does this have to do with bit-depth and audio sounding "bleached?" And how does this prove that bit-depth affects more than the noise floor?

--Ethan

 

[jkeny]

It would have helped if you explained that earlier.

Why?

Or if you even explained anything.

It would have made your listening different? So can you now hear the differences?

All you said was download the files and tell me what you hear.

Misquoting me again, tut, tut

I saw no visual evidence of pre-echo in the waveforms, though of course I wasn't looking for that.

Oh dear!

What does this have to do with bit-depth and audio sounding "bleached?" And how does this prove that bit-depth affects more than the noise floor?

--Ethan

That's your simplification, not mine!

 

[amirm]

I have received (anonymous & indirect) feedback that my posts in this thread appear to be unwelcoming to our newest industry members, Monty and jmvalin. Having looked back and reflected on it, I think the criticism is well placed and I apologize for that to both of them and members who were so disappointed in my interactions with them. As much as I try to have control over my emotions in these topics, some amount of it gets pulled in, in the heat of the argument. On WBF there is no excuse for that. These topics can be very complex and opinions and interpretation of science certainly polarizing to an extreme. All positions are welcome on WBF in these matters and nothing in me answering them should be taken as otherwise.

I wish Monty and Jmvalin would continue to contribute to this thread and elsewhere and find WBF a productive and comfortable "home" to have such discussions. Should they choose not to, it will be a source of severe disappointment for me personally.

Finally, you may want to know about an informal rule of mine: to the extent I am engaged in any discussion/argument with members, you will never see me exercise my forum powers to sanction my counterparts. Should an action be necessary, other members of our "management" team will be consulted and will make the final call, not me. So please do not fear any retribution and take comfort in me being no more privileged than you in this regard. Should you ever feel concerned, please feel free to contact Steve and voice it with him.

 

[xiphmont]

jkeny: Went to try an ABX on your samples... there's a shift or something in the files that gives away the X sample when switching (there's an audible time shift in the flip when switching between the samples when they're different but not when they're the same. I don't have to listen for differences at all, I can just listen for the time shudder). How were they prepared?

[edit: If I set the ABX tool to mask the transition (smooth attenuate to -Inf and back over 100ms to try to hide the time shift) then so far I cannot ABX. Still trying all the samples.]
[edit edit: Nope, complete fail with Squishyball set to 'mark flip'. No successful trials. ]

 

[microstrip]

I ripped the SACD and looked at the waveform and found it to be compressed with limiting. All peaks are at -0.3dBdsd. Definitely not racing stripes though.

Bruce,
Curiously I had listened to this CD many times and was not affected. But when I listened last week through the SF Aida's something seemed clearly out of proportion - it was at that time that I noticed that sound levels of the several instruments seemed wrong.

 

[xiphmont]

I wish Monty and Jmvalin would continue to contribute to this thread and elsewhere and find WBF a productive and comfortable "home" to have such discussions.

Thank you Amir. I appreciate you making this post.

 

[Gregadd]

That is proof of a positive hypothesis, not proof of a negative (null) hypothesis like arnyk was talking about. You cannot prove a null hypothesis, you can only confirm it.

Can I quote you on that?

 

[xiphmont]

Can I quote you on that?

Um... sure. Context?

 

[xiphmont]

jkeny: yep, you've got a rather noticeable time shift... 20 and 60 samples oddly enough... and a response ripple. Was the file made by combining two copies of the same file, one shifted down 40dB and the other delayed by 20/60 samples? You might want to trim the start of each sample, because the time shift is very obvious and gives away the test.

Here's the relative response/phase curve of your 20 sample shift to the original:

Here's the relative response/phase curve of your original to the 60 sample shift:

Previous experimentation also indicates that response ripple should be on the edge of detectable. I'd hazard it's the shift + FR ripple that people are hearing, not preecho.

 

[jkeny]

Previous experimentation also indicates that response ripple should be on the edge of detectable.

What level of response ripple is on the edge of detectable? Got some information about your experimentation details?

I'd hazard it's the shift + FR ripple that people are hearing, not preecho.

No ABX used in listening - no need, the differences were obvious enough. You say yourself that you can't hear the difference when the shift (during A/B) is disguised so how do you think others are able to hear it? They describe in detail what they heard & this concurred between their descriptions & concurred with what I heard.

Edit: Actually, I couldn't hear the differences with Foobar, only with Jplay

 

[thedudeabides]

I have received (anonymous & indirect) feedback that my posts in this thread appear to be unwelcoming to our newest industry members, Monty and jmvalin. Having looked back and reflected on it, I think the criticism is well placed and I apologize for that to both of them and members who were so disappointed in my interactions with them. As much as I try to have control over my emotions in these topics, some amount of it gets pulled in, in the heat of the argument. On WBF there is no excuse for that. These topics can be very complex and opinions and interpretation of science certainly polarizing to an extreme. All positions are welcome on WBF in these matters and nothing in me answering them should be taken as otherwise.

I wish Monty and Jmvalin would continue to contribute to this thread and elsewhere and find WBF a productive and comfortable "home" to have such discussions. Should they choose not to, it will be a source of severe disappointment for me personally.

Finally, you may want to know about an informal rule of mine: to the extent I am engaged in any discussion/argument with members, you will never see me exercise my forum powers to sanction my counterparts. Should an action be necessary, other members of our "management" team will be consulted and will make the final call, not me. So please do not fear any retribution and take comfort in me being no more privileged than you in this regard. Should you ever feel concerned, please feel free to contact Steve and voice it with him.

Amir,

Why don't you consider banning all manufacturing types. Assuming they are trying to be on their best behavior, it is impossible for them, or anyone for that matter, to respond in an objective, unbiased manner. For those without product / manufacturing ties, this group is merely expressing their personal opinion and not marketing their product with the possibility of financial gain.

As a newbie, I expect my comments to have little credibility but I do feel compelled to express my opinion on this issue.

 

[xiphmont]

What level of response ripple is on the edge of detectable?

It depends on frequency-- IIRC the most sensitive area is again in the 2-4kHz range where there's evidence to back up detection of .2dB but not .1dB. I don't recall if that data was collected with pure tones or narrow-band noise.

Got some information about your experimentation details?

Which? The listening or the graph?

Listening: Squishyball on a Headroom Portable Desktop Amp testing repeated on both Beyer DT-880 and Denon AH-D5000. Here's the last run I did:

fishcore:~/jkeny> squishyball -v -d 1 -b --gabbagabbahey FileK.wav FileL.wav
FileK.wav: loaded.
FileL.wav: loaded.
Opened alsa audio device 1 for 16 bit 2 channel 44100 Hz...
Input sample lengths do not match!
FileK.wav: 19.82
FileL.wav: 19.82
Using the shortest sample for playback length...

A/B/X test results:
Correct sample identified 6/20 trials.
Probability of 6 or better correct via random chance: 97.93%

Testing metadata:
Total time spent testing: 9:19.00
Total seeks: 17
Mark flip used 170 times.
Silent flip used 1 times.
Running totals (-g) displayed during test.

You hazard incorrectly - no ABX used in listening - no need, the differences were obvious enough.

So... how did you run your tests?

You say yourself that you can't hear the difference when the shift (during A/B) is disguised

Correct. I had no successful (positive result) test runs.

so how do you think others are able to hear it?

Perhaps they aren't?

 

[xiphmont]

Edit: Actually, I couldn't hear the differences with Foobar, only with Jplay

How does the Foobar ABX plugin handle sample switching, BTW? Does it attenuate, or beep or something at the transition? Glaring hole in my knowledge, I'm not really a Windows person

 

[jkeny]

So... how did you run your tests?

I edited my post after your reply. I couldn't hear any differences when using Foobar/ABX - I had to use Jplay. I already said, I used a random replay on Jplay (without looking) & identified the modified files 100% of the time (6 or 7 runs). Others just listened to the files as they didn't know their contents.

Perhaps they aren't?

Based on what evidence? Again, I edited after your post - the commonality between their descriptions & it's agreement with mine leads me to other conclusions!

 

[jkeny]

How does the Foobar ABX plugin handle sample switching, BTW? Does it attenuate, or beep or something at the transition? Glaring hole in my knowledge, I'm not really a Windows person

It operates by randomly assigning A or B to the two files you wish to compare you can play whichever one & switch between them at any stage in playback.

 

[xiphmont]

Based on what evidence?

Well... we don't really have any one way or the other. Eg, how did you know the choices were correct without looking at the playlist? Six or seven doesn't say much (I just now sat here hammering the 'A' key in 15 successive runs and got 7/7 twice and 0/7 once. Statistics.... dude), and then there's trusting others to report faithfully. There are plenty of ways this goes wrong, the same way that you don't get a random sequence by having people pick marbles out of a bag.

Others just listened to the files as they din't know their identities.

Heh. The first thing I did was look at the files in an analyzer. I would suspect more than a few reporters couldn't resist either. Even Tiefenbrun couldn't resist using any cues available to be right, he just got embarrassed/caught because he remembered the relay noises backwards!

The file sizes make guessing easy in retrospect too.

In short, you don't have any reason to trust me completely, and I don't have any reason to trust you completely, and neither of us should trust random reporters on the net especially if they're not even pretending to do a fully blind test. Collecting real data is doomed in an informal setting, so we have to settle for discussion and being content knowing how rigorous we ourselves are being. If you're being rigorous, have checked all the possibilities and are convinced you're really hearing something in a test we both agree is well constructed-- well, then maybe we should get together for a few beers in person.

Again, I edited after your post - their commonality of their descriptions & mine leads me to other conclusions!

No problem, I saw. I've been editing posts for clarity too.

I would think the difference between jplay and foobar would be a interesting investigation?

 

[xiphmont]

It operates by randomly assigning A or B to the two files you wish to compare you can play whichever one & switch between them at any stage in playback.

I meant, how does it handle the actual process of performing the switch? Does it beep. attenuate... 'pop'..?

 

[xiphmont]

Oh, and to be clear-- some level of preecho on this scale will eventually be audible, I'm not sure what the threshold will be. This is a true echo, though, not the kind of sinc spreading I think you were originally trying to illustrate? I've honestly lost track.

All I can say for certain: I personally don't hear it.