|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.192.114.195
I heard two contradicting claims about 44.1kHz/16bit audio. What do you think?
Dr. Diamond, who is doing research on music therapy, claims that 44.1kHz/16bit audio has the opposite effect of soothing effect.
In a TV program in Asia, Dr. Diamond tested muscle strength of a person while she/he was hearing the same music of different format: live music, LP, SACD, CD.
Muscle strength was weaker while listening to CD.
The people in the experiment were the TV program producer, camera man, and a guide (probably for English translation) for the Asian TV program team.
So human being seems to subconsciously distinguish CD from higher rez digital (SACD) or analogue (LP).
On the other hand, there was recently an ASE paper showing that people including audiophiles could not tell the difference in blind test between high rez digital and high rez digital with 44.1kHz/16bit AD and DA conversions inserted in the playback chain.
Follow Ups:
Here is the link to the reading list.
...with two different stimuli, for Dr. Diamond it's analogue music and then a CD, have someone try to push doown on your outstreched arm to test your strength.
It will always seem weaker on the B part of the A/B test.
Students of Aikido observe similar variations in strength when performing certain exercises.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
You're describing a basic kinesiology technique. When first introduced to it, I had little faith in its accuracy. The practitioner took me to a gym, where we tested a supplement that he had determined I needed. I tried 3 reps on a Nautilus type machine. First without the supplement placed in my front pocket, and then with. We repeated this experiment 3 times. My eyes were blind folded, so I couldn't see the read out on the dial. I gave it my all on every rep. I consistently pushed more weight on the second set of reps, with the supplement in my pocket.
---------------------------
Are you talking about "scientific kinesiology" or "pseudo scientific applied kinesiology"?
N.B. these are Wikipedia's terms, not mine.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
n
I am wondering if we get the same result with modern high end CDPs getting reviews that they sound very musically pleasing.
P.S.: I have no turntable or cassette deck at home. No modern high end CDP either.
Edits: 07/09/12
While I was googling, I read that "muscle strength test" is not the precise term for what Dr. Diamond did. Anyway, he wrote he did many controlled blind tests including the kind of test that I imprecisely called "muscle strength test".
Does anyone know what kind of CD player he used?
The Asian TV program I mentioned did not clearly show the CD player model Dr. Diamond used. The TV program team did their own experiment with a hospital and some scientists on plants' and unborn babies' response to LP, CD, and MP3. In the video, I could not tell with my eyes which CD player they used. The turntable they used in the hospital did not look like a high end model. It did not look like Linn Sondek, SME, etc. The MP3 player they used looked like a non-apple product.
c
Many audiophiles say that CD players and DA converters are improving significantly in recent years. Especially in reducing the "digital" feel.
Some audiophiles say that due to the improvement in digital technology, the sound quality of a very good CD player is now comparable to the sound from SACD or DVD-A.
SACD does not show the negative effect as CD, according to Dr. Diamond.I am wondering whether Dr. Diamond still observse the negative effect with CD players released recently and released for audiophile market, not mass market.
The AES paper claiming that audiophiles did not distinguish the insertion of 44.1kHz/16bit ADC DAC insertion is a fairly recent one. The digital technology improved significantly since Dr. Diamond reported the negative effect, and reported a PS (2003) at AES.
In the PS, he wrote that a big record company said to him that the record company was aware that Dr. Diamond was right about the negative effect of CD.
However, CDPs and DACs released recently sound less "digital" than those released in 2003.
Edits: 07/06/12 07/06/12 07/06/12 07/06/12
s
Just curious, but what were the errors in the paper?
Seems to me that if you're going to call a work "blatantly flawed", then you should provide some detail concerning the nature of your disagreement.
This has been discussed ad nauseum in past years. IMO this article is a poster boy for what is wrong with the AES and why it is a second rate organization, compared with other professional societies such as the IEEE.
Summary of search results:
"Found total of 175 records, Query: meyer +moran in All Forums"
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
...I'll go wandering in the forest when I have some idle time.
n
I'd cetainly want a lot more info before accepting the conclusion. After all the signal being heard off any digital device is analog.
If yo ca read thi then you reading th analo conversn of th digita sampl. A 16 bit file sample does not the original analog recording make.
...why do they all sound so different from each other, depending on the digital medium employed?
P.A.
> > ...why do they all sound so different from each other,
> > depending on the digital medium employed?
Analog sources differ vastly one from the other, even when playing the same LP or tape, yet that is obviously not the fault of digital. Don't forget that all digital sources have analog circuits in the chain that are just as susceptible to design & implementation differences as any other piece of analog equipment.
c
What was the methodology, and did it take into account dynamic range compression common on cd?
IE, was the music actually the same?
Afterwards we discovered faith; it's all you need
(Anyway he used classical music principally.) Then later he found that taped formats did not produce those unpleasant results. Strictly CD!
His field, in which he is highly regarded, is called applied kinesology.
P.A.
Ok but was the music the same?
The same mix?
Afterwards we discovered faith; it's all you need
...he based his findings on a broad range of tests. The music should have, as they say, fallen out.
P.A.
I just checked Wikipedia 'cause I'd never heard of "Applied Kinesology." Heh-heh. Great field to be highly regarded in.
And therefore his series of books, The Life Energy in Music, would not appeal to you.
P.A.
No way an amateur could match you, sneer for sneer. Gotta practice, I guess. Leaves no time for book-reading.
Are you dismissing these fields dogmatically or after having studied them? If the latter, inquiring minds seek your advice and guidance.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Sorry to be flippant (to you, not to Clark. Love to be flippant to Clark), but at 83 I've become somewhat judgmental about what deserves study and what doesn't. Life, as the saying goes, is too short.
That's a good explanation as well as a good excuse. :-)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
On the one hand, muscle strength decreased, presumably due to a negative effect on the brain. Of course, that's assuming subjects were not told what was being tested; and had no background knowledge; and the researcher was not biased as he tested strength.
On the other hand, we have subjective opinions by individuals about their ability to hear differences (not preferences).
Not the same methodology; or even similar. And we also have "unconscious" vs (presumably) conscious. I think it would be interesting to ask the people in the first group which version of the music they liked better. And interesting to see if their subjective choices "aligned" with their strength.
I remember that back in the day, Dr. Diamond was allied with Judith Reilly, whose claim to fame was her "discovery" that playing LPs produced from digital masters caused "microcracks" in turntable spindles. That was all I had to know about Dr. Diamond's credibility :-)
Edits: 07/05/12
Yes the Reilly character was crazee, but Dr. Diamond was never "allied" with her. He simply added (I forget where) that if digital can do unsuspected damage (however temporary) to muscles, then it wasn't impossible that it could affect (infect?) other areas.
P.A.
... like-minded.
I guess I'll have to test it by playing a cd during sex.
"LPs produced from digital masters caused "microcracks" in turntable spindles"
Very weird claim. Did he say sometime later that this claim was not right?
Yes, I'd say it was pretty weird. Amazingly, some of the audio mags took it seriously, or seemed to. The claim was Ms. Reilly's; Diamond supported it. Whether he ever recanted or apologized, I don't know.
He, of self proclaimed immaculate objectivity (ha, ha, ha!) thought that it proved all he needed to be proved.
He went for the cracked spindle thing and suggested we not play our TELARC lps.
I took it seriously for about five minutes and then put on one of those evil disks.
Not to discourage inquiry into what works and what doesn't for enjoying music in the home but one must learn to edit the silliest parts of your "thinking".
At the time I had a NORDIC TRACK in my listening room and I tried my same workout with both "pure" analogue playing and digitally recorded (all was on LP at this time) - I found I had no difference in my workouts.
It was most effective in getting the crazy's (US) to pay attention to them.
Nor were "workouts" what Diamond was discussing. His research in Applied Kinesiology was based (inter alia) on the deltoid response. It's a simple test and he found that not only CDs but sugar, fluorescent lights, some kinds of music etc. etc. will depress this response. (Wouldn't be surprised if some kinds of people will too!)
I recommend his three slim volumes in The Life Energy in Music series.
P.A.
"(Wouldn't be surprised if some kinds of people will too!)"
As you surmised, certain people provide positive and other negative contributions. I have experienced this effect while climbing mountains with different people. Certain places tend to accumulate positive and negative characteristics, and these can be influenced by positive and negative music.
The reference provids the outline of a conceptual framework to account for these and similar observations.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
v
Perhaps you could point us to those? (I'm guessing not, lol.) For a fact I can name four that spurned the whole idea.
P.A.
All I can come up with is either Stereophile or TAS, which took her seriously enough to bother debunking her. I'd look it up but haven't yet perfected my sneer. Takes time :-)
"All I can come up with is either Stereophile or TAS, which took her seriously enough to bother debunking her"
Debunking an idea does not imply that the idea was taken seriously. There are other reasons that one might attempt a debunk. The most obvious is curiousity. Even here, being curious need not imply initial doubt as to validity. It may be curiosity regarding how one would go about demonstrating the idea to be false, i.e. the idea represents a logical puzzle that one believes will be a fun mental exercise to solve. Also, one must not confuse the message with the messenger.
Yet another reason for debunking an idea is to separate sheep from goats, i.e. identify the people who will continue to believe in the idea even after the debunking. (One sees this often in matters of audiophilia, i.e. one can separate rational subjectivists from audiophools.) This is an ongoing process by which one can improve one's reasoning and powers of persuasion. In other words, this is a useful form of play.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"For a fact I can name four that spurned the whole idea."
The idea that digitally mastered LP can cause micro-cracks in the turntable spindle,
or the idea that digitally mastered LP can have negative effect on human?
.
> > Amazingly, some of the audio mags took it seriously, or seemed to...
Unfortunately, the writers for some high-end mags & web sites seem to live in utter fear that they'll miss out on the latest miraculous audio discovery. That leaves them susceptible to spurious claims and they'll go to great lengths to adopt some scientific-sounding theory that seems to make it all possible.
I continue to find it ironic that the subjective types are the most likely to reject subjective influences as an explanation.
Wonder how long it'll be before we find the latest round of audio improvements based on the Higgs Boson particle....
Way back when, Clark Johnsen put me onto the turntable claim, and I proceeded to debunk it, starting out with a virgin Sota Sapphire, measuring its wow and flutter, playing some of the "evil" Telarc LPs, and repeating the measurements which were identical.
Here's the irony. A few years later, the turntable started slowly degrading, until it became quite obvious that the main bearing had failed. Cause and effect? I doubt it.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
The Judith Reilly curse? We best not defame the lady :-)
Sources/methodologies?
Sr. Sean Olvie of Harman published results at AES that, in scientific tests (not mere A/B comparisons), young listeners preferred 16/44 audio over lossy alternatives when given the choice.
As with focus groups, there are ways to structure A/B tests to give you whatever result you want.
Peter Belt here we come. The biggest of the loonies.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: