|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
31.24.138.126
In Reply to: RE: to wit, ear training of some sort is vital posted by Story on August 06, 2022 at 14:16:38
The scientific research that has gone into testing digital codecs from hi res to MP3 as well as redbook has all been done with trained listeners. And the amount of data accumulated in those controlled tests was massive.
If someone can't hear real differences in a simple ABX DBT because they lack listener training they sure aren't hearing those differences under casual listening conditions. Well designed ABX double blind tests are, contrary to popular audiophile folklore, pretty much the most sensitive protocols for detecting actual audible differences.
Follow Ups:
Have you participated in simple ABX DBT tests?Have you ever heard differences between anything in a simple ABX DBT test?
If so can/will you describe that in detail?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 08/06/22
And when I am having trouble discerning differences in my preference comparisons I do a simple ABX DBT to see if there is any difference to be heard. And yes, using an ABX test I can much more easily discern that there is an actual difference, when there is one to be heard. It allows me to change my focus from what do I like better to what differences do I actually hear. I can switch back and forth and focus on different elements of the sound. *That* is what makes those tests more sensitive than casual non time synced comparisons. With quick switching you can listen for and lock in on very subtle specific differences. You can't do that without time synced quick switching. You lose it in the brief time delay. Sometimes with digital sources I find there actually was no audible difference. At least none that I could detect. Certainly none worth worrying about.
I was looking for date, time, list of participants, what gear was used, what was being compared, details of how the "time synced"/"lever matched" was accomplished, list of results-trial by trial-participant by participant, etc...
"I can switch back and forth and focus on different elements of the sound." is a little confusing to me. Can you expand on that in contest of an ABX test?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"I was looking for date, time,"
I don't keep that kind of information.
"list of participants," usually just me. Sometimes I have one friend who also participates.
"what gear was used,"
It was pretty much with my previous system. I think that one is still listed. If not Sound Lab A3s, Vandersteen sub, ARC electronics SP 10 pre D 115 power. FOrsell Air Reference with flywheel, Koetsu Rosewood Signature. Tascam digital recorder
"what was being compared,"
Oh jeez, I'd have to go back and look at my comparison notes. But it would include a number of comparisons of many classical and jaz titles on the various audiophile reissues. A lot of Yes records.
"details of how the "time synced"/"lever matched" was accomplished,"
That was done on it's own by the Tascam digital recorder. It has a monitor and bypass switch. Same level with no noticble latency.
"list of results-trial by trial" I do keep track of the results but I am working in Italy right now and I leave those notes in the stereo room. Off the top of my head I prefered the AP Fragile over the Mofi and over any original pressings. But I am going to have to go back and revisit all of those comparisons with the new system. A couple specific instances where I was struggling to choose a favorite and resorted to ABX was with an original U.S. Piros pressing of The Yes Album compared to a New ealand pressing. That was a long time ago. In ABX I could only detect a difference in surface noise. When I checked the dead wax it turned out that the plates were from the same exact father. Another time was with the James Boyk Perfomance Recording of Pictures at an Exhibition. He recorded it both digitally and on his custom analog tape deck. Very hard to pick a favorite.Not nearly as hard to tell there was a difference in an ABX comparison.
""I can switch back and forth and focus on different elements of the sound." is a little confusing to me. Can you expand on that in contest of an ABX test?"
For sure. I can focus on say the bass. How extended is it? Go back and forth quickly listening for a shift in bass extension. Low level detail. Focus on something in the mix that is barely audible. Go back and forth quickly, is the level of audibility shifting? Spectral balance, Focus on overall tonality, switch back and forth quickly. Do I hear a shift. And I can go right on down the line and focus on each aspect of the sound individually and listen for shifts, even very subtle shifts in the back and forth. Once I feel I have zeroed in on specific differences I do the X part of the ABX focusing on the differences I sorted out before hand. Makes identifying even the most subtle differences much more reliable.
"list of results-trial by trial"
I was asking for the tally of how many correct vs. how many wrong ABX answers. Isn't that, in the end, the proof?
Thanks.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Yes it is but I wasn't trying to "prove" anything with these personal ABX tests. I was just checking to see if there was any differences there to be heard. In both examples I gave you I was batting 1000 after about 6 or 7 trials. I had zeroed in on the differences and it was pretty easy to idenify them in those ABX comparisons. which was my point.The ABX DBT was more sensitive to audible differences than my A/B preference test which is way more sensitive to any non synced non quick switching sighted comparisons.
I have done a few CD vs SACD tests and failed to find a difference to lock onto. If I can't lock onto a difference in an extensive A/B quick switching synced comparison looking just for audible differences I see no reason to do ABX. I wouldn't know what to listen for.
I have some Mobile Fidelity Original Master LPs, but most of them were bought back around 1990 or so when our local Turtles Records store was having a going out of business sale, and I bought a large stack of them for $5.99 each. So the controversy is largely academic to me.
However it does bring a different thought to my mind. I have been called a tin eared apostate heretic because I use a DEQX DSP to control my DIY fully horn loaded triamplified speakers. I've been asked by analog purists why I even bother to play LPs on my Clearaudio turn table since the digital process is going to "obviously" screw up the sound. Perhaps those analog purists aren't as able to hear a digital step as they have convinced themselves they are.
I dream of an America where a chicken can cross the road without having it's motives questioned.
Edits: 08/07/22
he needs a little help in other words
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: