|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.95.36.62
I think now I have seen it all. Since I have participated in various audio forums, and especially computer audio forums, I have seen so much bunk spread it really is comical.
Among the absolute bogus garbage I have seen:
-different rippers create vastly different sound rips. BS. I have rips in my collection done with XLD, iTunes, EAC, on macs, and PCs, and there is never, ever a variation in quality during playback.
-different lossless formats sound different, as do AIFF and WAV. Bullcrap. Especially with network playback.
-different brands of drives "sound different". Laughable.
And now we have the CROWN JEWEL..rips done with different power supplies sound "different". Dear lord.
And no, I don't think everything sounds the same. I can easily hear differences in DACS, digital cables, streamers, and sample rates.
All of this maybe interesting for 'discussion" but they all, without exception turn into circle jerks that keep posters from actually listening to and discussing music.
Follow Ups:
Rips with different supplies is definitely dubious, but the other are real and I even demonstrate them at trade shows like RMAF and Newport.
The requirement to hear these differences is an extremely resolving system with really low noise floor. If you don't have this, then you will not hear it, pain and simple.
Just because you don't see satellites flying overhead doesn't mean they are not there. You just need a better telescope.
Steve N.
All your results prove is that Empirical Audio DACs suck because they are unable to isolate the timing with which they use audio data from the timing with which the data was transmitted to them. But anyone who has ever objectively listened to one could probably tell you that.
Edits: 12/15/14
If they sucked so bad, I don't think they would be winning shootouts. Go back to your video game please....
C'mon Steve, the "your system does not resolve" reply is old.
I am sure if your life depended on it you could not determine an error corrected iTUNES rip from an XLD or any other rip.
You also claim that digital cables of different lengths sound different. Love to see prove that in a blind test.
Digital cable length difference blind test was performed by UHFmag.com several years ago. Definitively proves that certain lengths are superior. UHF in Canada was skeptical about my paper when it came out, so they did this A/BX test without my knowledge. Now they are believers.
The analysis in my positive-feedback whitepaper already proves this, but the layman cannot always understand this.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
"Just because you don't see satellites flying overhead doesn't mean they are not there. You just need a better telescope"
I see satellites flying overhead with my naked eyes. I look at in the right direction at the right time on clear nights. :-)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
You don't see them all, I guarantee it.
I can guarantee that I saw all of them in October 1957. :-)
The ISS is almost as bright as Venus. I have seen it lying in bed in my bedroom, but usually the orbit doesn't line up right with the view out my windows.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I live up in the mountains at 3300 feet elevation and they have rules here about pointing lights skyward. I see everything.
I don't think that's how public forum works.
How about this instead: you just ignore topics that you have no interest in, or those that irritate you, make you angry or unhappy? I do, for example - be it handling of classical metadata by JRiver, virtues of award-winning Apple customer service, Smart TVs for dumb (m)assess, or the sheer stupidity of insisting that differences between DACs are larger than between computer tweaks.
Try it - it's easy enough.
Boy..that is a lot of stuff to ignore...for both of us.
While I see hour point, in an ideal world a Computer Audio forum should see topics posted about DACs, HD Downloads, cables, etc.
I would also think there should be a Fringe Forum for discussing esoteric topics.
"I would also think there should be a Fringe Forum for discussing esoteric topics."
Try the Isolation Ward.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
A fellow audio nut sent me two music files: one ripped with an after market power supply (can't remember which one but I think it's battery based) and one w the wall wart.
I haven't listened to them yet- my system is in a bit of a flux as my amps are being worked on. The files are sitting in dropbox and would be glad to send them to you if you care to "investigate" (PM me). I have no opinion either way as I have no actual experience. All your "definitive" statements have nothing referring to real world discovery. Which makes me think you believe in Mythology as long as its Your Mythology. Here's your chance to redeem yourself.
He says the difference is obvious.
Lokie:
I have no problem checking out the files. Why don't you post them here for everybody?
If not send me the DB links via Asylum email. I'm game.
You won't like mine and others findings that different versions of the control program for MQn player make a difference to the sound in the ram in the play program.All the control program does is load data from the wav file and put it into the ram of the play program, it can then be shut down.
So somehow the control program is putting something into the way the bits are held in ram that affects the sound, the bits are identical between versions.
I'm going to see if the same effect can be heard if wav files are copied optimally.
Think you're just advocating a stance that ignorance is good or your system/hearing aren't resolving enough and you don't mind, which is a different issue.
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/
Edits: 12/12/14
There are good reasons why changing the control program might affect the sound quality. It might not be necessary for the control program to be running to affect the sound on playback. It might not be necessary for the control program to even be loaded in memory to have an effect. For example, two different control programs could result in the play program or the audio samples being loaded in different places in memory. Also, they could have left the CPU caches in different states.
If you want to have a fair shot at a valid experiment you would need to verify that both control programs left RAM memory in the exact same state, which means that the audio data has not only to be the same, it has to be stored in the same locations and every other memory location in the RAM has to be identical. In other words, the entire RAM has to be scrubbed except for the audio. At the least this will require verification that the audio data is loaded in the same locations and is unchanged. Scrubbing the rest of the RAM can probably be accomplished by rebooting the computer, if the audio data in RAM can be somehow protected. (I say "probably" because there still could be logic state that does not get reset at the time of a software reboot.)
Beware of the Turing tar-pit in which everything is possible but nothing of interest is easy.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"There are good reasons why changing the control program might affect the sound quality."
Or are there not good reasons? What exactly are you saying? If you are trying to assert that a "control program might affect the sound quality" you certainly have a roundabout and equivocal way of saying so.
C'mon, stake out a position!
People here have scolded me for asking to see measurements to back up audible claims by saying that hearing a difference lead to subsequent changes in measurements. The implication of course (if indeed not the assertion) is that hearing is superior to measurement.
Any guess as to when we'll see measurements to back up or refute any claims that "control programs might affect the sound quality?"
JE
I already staked out my position. I would assume that the readers are intelligent enough to understand what I was saying. This is a computer audio forum and I would expect people who say that something is possible or impossible to have some experience with computer programs and computer programming. I would expect them to understand that buggy programs can do things that astonish their creators.
It is hard to communicate effectively with fools and trolls.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
my mqnplayer is there to try with different control programs, no one that has tried it says they haven't heard a difference. Maybe self selecting, but without suitable measurements it's all we've got.
I'm going to create a program that reads and outputs a wav file to see if the effect can be heard in different players, the sound can be made better or worse.
talk of buggy software is just childish, the last 2 versions only changed in terms of process/thread priority and switching thread boost off and the code is at such a minimum that it just reads file to ram and writes from ram to ram in play program, the only differences are settings in opening the file, ram alignment, ram security settings and compile/linker settings. The play program is even more optimised being just 3.2 kb as until recently I thought the control optimisation didn't matter.
If the effect is repeatable and other people are reporting the effect on their systems without prompting then don't see the requirement to ensure ram is identical etc, if others want to test that then am happy to provide code to help them do that. Sometimes an effect is too much for some people and they prefer one version over another. Needless to say most people trying it have better resolving systems than I do. They seem to like the bugs.
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/
People have reported hearing differences that are "impossible", where I have put quotes to indicate that perhaps these people don't know what they are talking about. I assume if many people report hearing "impossible" differences that at least some of them did hear real differences. I am not a BS "objectivist" who claims that this must be impossible and therefore people making these reports must be liars or fools.
My objection is not with the people making listening reports. My objection is with the people claiming that what they heard was "impossible". From all I can tell, the people claiming that theses differences are "impossible" have little or no clue regarding the inner workings of computer hardware and software as relates to audio playback. This is easily deduced from reading their posts.
I have yet to see a computer program that worked perfectly, except those that I wrote myself, of course. And in one case, I went so far as to make a bet at 10,000 to 1 odds there were no bugs, but nobody took me up on the bet. :-) They would have lost. See link.
Lots of audiophiles prefer distorted playback. It may be because their goal is just to hear what they like without reference to what was actually recorded, possibly because they have no clue as to how the recording was supposed to sound. This is the usual situation for studio recordings that are highly processed. For live recordings of acoustic music, music lovers with frequent concert experiences have a much better chance of a reference, but even here it can be dodgy. IMO, the only way to get a solid handle on this issue is to make and playback recordings of live performances. If one is focusing on digital distortions, one can also do tape - amp - speaker vs. tape - digital; digital - amp -speaker tests and use the tape playback as the reference. However, if differences are found there won't be a way of distinguishing whether the differences come from the ADC, the file format, or the DAC. More complex tests will be needed to isolate the cause(s) of differences, and these won't be easy or definitive.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
if it's a bug then it would affect the sound, the player has been tested and is bit perfect.think the people who try it know more than I do about computer audio, so trust their feedback. Some like a brighter more analytical sound than I do.
the effect seems to be able to be stored in the bits in ram, that's the new thing to me, which I wouldn't have believed until I heard it, because I've compared linear powered rips with normal rips before and thought they sounded different, but thought it was impossible. This seems to be the same effect.
Whether people no longer need to worry about linear ps when ripping if they can just load the file in an optimal way remains to be seen, I've never been that careful when ripping.
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/
Edits: 12/15/14
Each bit in DRAM is stored in a tiny capacitor. This capacitor is charged with a small number of electrons. Below a certain number it's a 0. Above that number a 1. There is a dedicated capacitor for each bit and a transistor that serves as a switch to connect this bit onto a sense wire, where the number of electrons can be measured. Now the problem is that the electrons slowly leak away for various physical reasons. (This depends on the temperature of the substrate, residual radioactivity, etc...) If there were initially a large number of electrons that represented a 1 then after leakage they may enter in to the ?? range, or even leak down to look like a 0. To deal with this problem, there is a memory controller. It reads every memory location (refresh operation) about once a second. Each bit that is read is rewritten back so that it is close to the ideal number of electrons for a 0 or a 1. This is the equivalent to looking at a smudged image by eye and recopying on a clean piece of paper.
It seems most unlikely that hidden information will survive after a few seconds of recopying. It seems much more likely that the data in RAM is not identical in the two test cases, or that there is data stored elsewhere in the computer system that is different. It is possible to compare the contents of RAM memory by loading special software with a special boot loader program, but probably not all other parts of system state. I would expect things like processor cache may differ and this may have important implications on system performance. Unfortunately, these factors depend on the specific processor and motherboard models.
There are many ways to explore this rabbit hole in depth. However, IMO unless the entire contents of RAM is validated to be identical in the two cases there is little point in proceeding further. I recall the WAV to FLAC to WAV vs. original WAV issue. At first glance, the audio samples in the two WAV files were identical, but after investigating further, the two files were not identical, as their meta-data differed. I see no reason to believe this case is any different.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
how could changing the priority of the process affect the bits in RAM ? There's something about how the data is stored that's affecting the sound, all I'm doing is reading it in and writing it out, there's no data manipulation. Read in 4k at a time. Some people say the noise in digital audio is due to rf noise, is it possible that cpu rf noise is getting modulated into the bits ? others say digital audio should be thought of as analogue, in which case a modulated signal would be possible.
http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/
None of this noise "should" make it through the DAC. However, it does. How and why will depend on the specific equipment. Some people have looked at the noise spectrum of most DACs and there is a lot of RF noise that doesn't show up in typical spec sheet or magazine review measurements. Miksa (posts on computer audiophiles) has done a lot of these.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
The forum has been relatively peaceful the last several months.
"The forum has been relatively peaceful the last several months."
This forum. The action is elsewhere...
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Typical, non factual response.
The canned "ignorance is bliss, your system can't resolve" post. Nice.
There are many such myths here but no one can discredit what another person hears or thinks he hears. And then the sheep follow. Some weird tweaks may actually make a difference, and on this forums they are always for the better. ;-)On the other hand, there have been some posts that are flat out technically wrong, whether one hears a difference or not. I actually got banned for a week for pushing the issue one time. Speaking the truth can get you kicked off this forum!
Here are some examples that come to mind:
- Create more than one partition on an SSD to minimize wear on the other partition. Doesn't work that way. The controller and firmware wear leveling scheme completely abstracts the concept of partitions when it comes to writing data. In other words, you have no control as to which NAND cells get written to.
- Defragging an SSD to improve it's performance. That will only prematurely wear the SSD, as most everyone knows. Yet this tweak happy inmate fell prey to marketing hype in a piece of (defragging) software he used religiously on his SSD.
- Ferrite chokes on a USB cable causes data errors. Sure, that's why at least a few 'audiophile' USB cable makers use them including Kimber, iFi, and others.
- 50 Ohm and 75 Ohm BNC are not mechanically interchangeable due to pin and mating socket diameter differences. This may cause damage. That was only true pre-1980's before new standards were established. I've worked with several BNC, PL-259, type N, type F connectors and various coax cables over the decades.
Edits: 12/11/14
The single biggest piece of mythology is the superiority of WAV or AIFF over FLAC or ALAC because of "processing"..even when everything is buffered into memory.
A $200 iPhone can decode a 192 Khz file without a hitch, so the whole premise is ludicrous.
Support many of your assertions.
Well..there are a few of us...with more experience you will find those assertions become even more valid.
+1
"We are all in God's hands... and God is a malign thug."
-Mark Twain
Thank you.
On a completely different topic, I said:
Some people practice black magic so long it seems like science.
Repeat the biggest piece of bullshit often enough and it can go mainstream.
"Repeat the biggest piece of bullshit often enough and it can go mainstream."
Here ya go. HDtracks.com's downloads are inferior because their hosting company doesn't use audiophile grade Ethernet cables in the data center.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
LOL. This could end up quoted on other forms, then spiral.
Don't be surprised if a thread pops up 3 months from now"
"(I heard)ProStudioMasters downloads of the same albums sound better because they use Audioquest Ethernet cables"
I love threads that begin with "I heard..."
The drive offsets can be different and this can show up somehow in the ripped file even if the CONTENT of the file is bit identical.
Some claim to hear this "difference".
Please. Don't shoot the messenger! ;)
But TECHNICALLY the files, if a different offset was encountered, are not IDENTICAL. Even if this number is just a tag stored under "drive offset". I'm not sure how it works. Others with Audio OCD might want to revisit that. I, myself, do not!
Cheers,
Presto
No worries, no firing squad in position!
I just am amused at just how much damage so called experts and gurus have done to this sector of the hobby.
I have been told directly such garbage such as iTunes rips are crap, and that "eventually" I will be reripping my entire library if I don't rip to WAV, and other bunk.
It never ends..now we have clowns telling people they should upsample their redbook rips to DSD, and that there are "digital" power cords...but the best is you need a USB cable with physically separated power and data leads.
I thought the panacea was a data only USB connection with completely separate power supplies!!
Or maybe we would just get a "bi-wire" USB cable... :P
Cheers,
Presto
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: