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?
Last edited:
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?
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.
Why?It would have helped if you explained that earlier.
It would have made your listening different? So can you now hear the differences?Or if you even explained anything.
Misquoting me again, tut, tutAll you said was download the files and tell me what you hear.
Oh dear!I saw no visual evidence of pre-echo in the waveforms, though of course I wasn't looking for that.
That's your simplification, not mine!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
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.
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.
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.
What level of response ripple is on the edge of detectable? Got some information about your experimentation details?Previous experimentation also indicates that response ripple should be on the edge of detectable.
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.I'd hazard it's the shift + FR ripple that people are hearing, not preecho.
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.
What level of response ripple is on the edge of detectable?
Got some information about your experimentation details?
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.
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?
Edit: Actually, I couldn't hear the differences with Foobar, only with Jplay
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.So... how did you run your tests?
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!Perhaps they aren't?
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
Based on what evidence?
Others just listened to the files as they din't know their identities.
Again, I edited after your post - their commonality of their descriptions & mine leads me to other conclusions!
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.