Propeller Head Plaza

For your information...

71.231.2.119

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

real_jj

(M)

In Reply to: I don't think the motivation is that sinister... posted by E-Stat on May 23, 2006 at 14:28:01:

Many people do not use monitor speakers.
The program material is not specified, for obvious reasons. You select program material that is important to the test at hand.
You can get more time, it's not banned.
The playback system also varies, but ABC/hr is really the gold standard for near-transparent playback.

Follow Ups:

Thank you - E-Stat 05:25:40 05/24/06 (9)
I'm not researching a thesis - just curious as to some of the details.
So, the DAC of choice using ABC/hr is the Java sound library for Windows.
rw
- Um, the java sound library isn't a DAC - real_jj 07:40:49 05/24/06 (8)
  You can use most any DAC that windows talks to. Of course you do want a good DAC.
  There are multiple ABC/hr programs out there. I think www.audioresearchlabs.com has one. I THINK that's their url.
  - Duh - E-Stat 08:23:43 05/24/06 (7)
    So the tests are conducted with a computer based transport to some sound card?
    rw
    - Use what you like... - real_jj 09:56:12 05/24/06 (6)
      Personally I wouldn't use anything that resides inside a computer, for what I suspect are obvious reasons.
      There are some very good alternatives that live outside the computer.
      But a computer-based transport (of course, when it's something digital being changed, not something down the chain) does offer the easiest way to switch.
      If you're testing cables, now, that's a different issue. You will probably have to abandon fast switching, and simply get a party behind a screen to plug them in and out. (I'm prepared to say that cables that create a level difference are, well, a touch odd.)
      For equipment with different gains, you have to also normalize the gain.
      For equipment with different frequency response (in any substantial fashion), well, d'oh, of course it sounds different.
      - Perhaps you misunderstand - E-Stat 10:08:36 05/24/06 (5)
        
        In Reply to: Use what you like... posted by real_jj on May 24, 2006 at 09:56:12:
        
        I ask these questions not to duplicate or perform testing on my own, but rather to understand how such test are getting carried out today.
        Personally I wouldn't use anything that resides inside a computer, for what I suspect are obvious reasons.
        Indeed. RFI abounds.
        How then do you run a Windows based front end program without using a computer?
        rw
        
        You are aware that there are external DAC's for computers, yes? - real_jj 13:39:01 05/24/06 (4)
        
        In Reply to: Perhaps you misunderstand posted by E-Stat on May 24, 2006 at 10:08:36:
        
        Including ones that run on things like light fiber.
        (I'm not naming any specific product, I don't do that. But somebody who posts here once in a while certainly might be able to.)
        
        I was not, but... - E-Stat 14:02:10 05/24/06 (3)
        
        In Reply to: You are aware that there are external DAC's for computers, yes? posted by real_jj on May 24, 2006 at 13:39:01:
        
        more importantly, are those commonly used in conjuction with the PC based software?
        rw
        
        Lots of choices - Ted Smith 23:13:24 05/24/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: I was not, but... posted by E-Stat on May 24, 2006 at 14:02:10:
        
        Howdy
        For a quick intro check out http://www.edirol.com or http://www.motu.com
        Many PC sound cards (both consumer and pro) support TOSLink and S/PDIF. Also USB DACs are becoming popular.
        But for serious sound quality you need a pro audio card which keeps the clock and data separate, etc. I've been out of the market for a while so I won't make any specific recommendations.
        FWIW: For quick and dirty blind and double blind interconnect tests I wire up my multichannel DAC with identical digital inputs (from a Nirvis DXS crosspoint digital switch) and put up to three sets of test interconnects between the DAC and my pre-amp. I then let either let my computer or the test subject use the preamp input select to change interconnects. This works quite well, but I've discovered that for the level of certainty (or differences, depending on how you look at it) I care about I get the same results with blind tests on my daughter and wife so I don't usually bother these days.
        -Ted
        
        It occurs to me, I know of one published configuration I can talk about... - real_jj 14:35:53 05/24/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: I was not, but... posted by E-Stat on May 24, 2006 at 14:02:10:
        
        It had an SGI O2 with 8-channel card, running via ADAT fibre link to a Graham-Patton ADAT-> AES/EBU splitter. The AES/EBU splitter and the 4 Apogee AES/EBU dacs were run off a word clock, which was extended to the SGI board as well, so all ran synchronously.
        The hardware still sits gathering dust, I believe.
        
        Hard to say... - real_jj 14:10:55 05/24/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: I was not, but... posted by E-Stat on May 24, 2006 at 14:02:10:
        
        In the setups I've seen, all but one of them had positively immaculate audio quality. I don't generally refer to the practices at the one that did not.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.

You can not post to an archived thread.