Digital Drive

Upsamplers, DACs, jitter, shakes and analogue withdrawals, this is it.

Return to Digital Drive

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different?

172.98.67.29
Posted on January 27, 2019 at 14:46:39
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 Greetings Audio Asylum Digital Drive!

So, do CD/digital players converting 16/44.1 sound the same/different? The real question I suspect is "how different"!

When I came across a post on the Steve Hoffman Forum initially last year and the ~90%:1% result, it got me thinking about doing a blind test to see if I can gather some real-world data using my hi-res ADC.

Come and try the "Blind Test" linked below and let me know your preferences!

4 "blinded" devices to listen to from different classes, 4 sample excerpts to try. Which device(s) sound best? Is there a big difference? Lemme know! It might affirm your opinion, or maybe surprised by your results...

Test closes on April 30, 2019. Plenty of time to listen and let me know. As usual, once the test closes, I'll let you guys know which devices were used in the recordings and how people voted!

Have fun listening!
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Do Trolls ever engage in good evaluations? -t, posted on January 28, 2019 at 09:23:47
Sordidman
Audiophile

Posts: 13665
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 .

"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

 

Pointless test, posted on January 28, 2019 at 09:32:40
Dave_K
 Whatever differences there may or may not be, your test results are going to be inconclusive because you're running the players' output through a subsequent AD/DA. And to make things worse, the final DA conversion is different for every participant in the test. Surely this is obvious?

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on January 28, 2019 at 10:32:34
Sordidman
Audiophile

Posts: 13665
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 Of course....

But some people go through tons of (unreasonable) gymnastics in an effort to make something into what it is not....

"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on January 28, 2019 at 13:40:21
geoffkait
 Even without those issues negative results of blind tests never really mean anything since too many things can go wrong with any test. Now, if the results are positive that's a different story since results were positive in spite of all the things that could have gone wrong.

 

I'd play if, posted on January 28, 2019 at 16:11:37
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 he found something actually interesting to hear that is available on streaming sites. I've got Qobuz, but that version of Handel is not there. My first comparison would be to compare any of those tracks to what I'm able to hear to evaluate the test setup.

Crowd chants? It would be a genuine chore to hear any differences with that content regardless of quality.

And if the source is 44/16, why upconvert that to 96/24? Now we're also hearing the effects of that process. My objective when comparing gear is to minimize variables, not introduce multiple new ones in the mix. :)

The Faerie Sorcerer of Deceitful Magics strikes again with more irrelevant parlor games. :)

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on January 28, 2019 at 18:41:16
G Squared
Audiophile

Posts: 8491
Location: Washington, DC Metro Area
Joined: November 16, 2004
Contributor
  Since: May 23, 2023
 So we only accept positive "results" as potentially informative? I am struggling to understand the scientific reasoning for that. I could have accepted the the uncertainty of the results is too high to be informative.
Gsquared

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on January 29, 2019 at 05:11:47
geoffkait
 Yes, only accept positive results. Throw the others away fast!

 

RE: BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different?, posted on January 30, 2019 at 03:18:08
HiOnFi
Audiophile

Posts: 1645
Location: Florida
Joined: January 11, 2004
 A lot depends on which cables are being used to connect it

Case in point: I bought a new Marantz HD CD 1 to be used as a transport connected to a Audio Alchemy DAC/Pre via WireWorld Toslink (left over from an old player whose best output was toslink). After the player was fully broken in I decided to determine how much better COAX would be

One would think I replaced the humble $600 MSRP Marantz with a very expensive player or DAC

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on February 3, 2019 at 12:38:31
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 Well, that's assuming:

1. The high resolution studio AD at 24/96 cannot capture the difference between say a DAC >$1000 and a "freebie" DAC costing a few bucks.

2. You're assuming that listeners at home have poor DACs and sound systems and poor ears such that they can't reproduce the above and hear a difference.

Perhaps you can't believe the above may be incorrect. Not sure I would make such assumptions for others...

-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

RE: BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different?, posted on February 3, 2019 at 12:40:15
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 "A lot depends on which cables are being used to connect it

Case in point: I bought a new Marantz HD CD 1 to be used as a transport connected to a Audio Alchemy DAC/Pre via WireWorld Toslink (left over from an old player whose best output was toslink). After the player was fully broken in I decided to determine how much better COAX would be

One would think I replaced the humble $600 MSRP Marantz with a very expensive player or DAC"

Hi HiOnFi - let's just say I selected the worst cables for what I think most here would consider as the worst devices to pair in that comparison!
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

RE: I'd play if, posted on February 3, 2019 at 12:44:34
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 "he found something actually interesting to hear that is available on streaming sites. I've got Qobuz, but that version of Handel is not there. My first comparison would be to compare any of those tracks to what I'm able to hear to evaluate the test setup.

Crowd chants? It would be a genuine chore to hear any differences with that content regardless of quality.

And if the source is 44/16, why upconvert that to 96/24? Now we're also hearing the effects of that process. My objective when comparing gear is to minimize variables, not introduce multiple new ones in the mix. :)

The Faerie Sorcerer of Deceitful Magics strikes again with more irrelevant parlor games. :)"

"Parlor games" E-Stat? Nobody's upconverting anything. I'm just recording the 16/44 analogue output with even higher resolution 24/96 using the same high resolution ADC which I know is capable of capturing beyond the 16/44 resolution fed into the devices. It would be ridiculous to capture at 24/44 and miss some ultrasonics to >40kHz and a waste of data at 24/192 for "standard resolution" playback.

Whether you like the tracks is another matter and not relevant.
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

RE: I'd play if, posted on February 3, 2019 at 14:06:00
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 .Nobody's upconverting anything. I'm just recording the 16/44 analogue output with even higher resolution 24/96

Yo, Arch. That's called upsampling. :)

It would be ridiculous to capture at 24/44 and miss some ultrasonics to >40kHz and a waste of data at 24/192 for "standard resolution" playback..

When the original content is 44/16, you're wasting your time. There are no additional bits to capture. Increasing the sample rate after the fact is useless. A recurring theme of many of your activities.

Whether you like the tracks is another matter and not relevant.

Only relevant if you want folks to participate. If your goal is establishing that folks cannot reliably hear differences using truly crappy quality recordings, you've likely succeeded!

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on February 7, 2019 at 07:44:48
Dave_K
 The main problem you have is multiple uncontrolled variables, some of which may be interacting. You're introducing two additional conversions between analog and digital domains after the DAC under test. There are opportunities for interaction between chained anti-aliasing and reconstruction filters. Clocks are not synchronized, so clock rate and phase differences are additional random variables. Also, jitter from the DUTs will be turned into sample errors by the ADC, to unpredictable effect. And there are multiple opportunities for masking. But probably the biggest uncontrolled variable you have is that everyone's playback system is different. The right way to do this kind of blind preference-based evaluation is to get everyone together in the same place so that all participants hear the DUTs the same way.

 

RE: Pointless test, posted on February 7, 2019 at 12:22:49
pictureguy
Audiophile

Posts: 22597
Location: SoCal
Joined: October 19, 2008
 The point is that you went to (obviously) a fair amount of trouble making up the test, it is than subject to a further round of DAC /ADC insults and another round of electronics / cables / amps before reaching the end-users EARS.

I don't see the value in this test, overall. A non-result is OBVIOUSLY the result of some problem at the users end.....poorly resolving system, a budget DAC, poor setup or 'other'.

The conclusion was reached even before data collection.


Too much is never enough

 

RE: BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different? , posted on February 8, 2019 at 09:44:21
geoffkait
 Cables are almost impossible to test, mainly because of disrupting the delicate electrical mechanical interface when disconnecting the cables. Then it takes some time, who knows, maybe a couple of days, to reestablish the delicate electrical mechanical interface. So, theoretically, unless you wait at least a couple of days the test is invalid. No ifs ands or buts. That doesn't even address cable break-in - another reason to discount most cable tests. Yet people persist. Who knows why? Not to mention there are many other reasons to discount cable tests, you know, the usual things that can go wrong with any test, including the ones mommy never told you about.

 

RE: BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different?, posted on February 23, 2019 at 13:50:34
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 For those concerned about whether the test samples at 24/96 captured potentially significant amounts of ultrasonic artifacts from digital filters.

An article looking at "real world" playback based on a couple of the blind test devices used...
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

RE: BLIND TEST INVITE: Do digital audio players sound different?, posted on May 4, 2019 at 17:59:31
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 Hey guys. Thanks for the participation!

Here are the devices "unblinded".

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2019/05/blind-test-results-part-1-do-digital.html

Will post discussions and analysis of the results in future blog installments .
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

Listener results..., posted on May 18, 2019 at 11:44:14
Archimago
Audiophile

Posts: 821
Joined: January 18, 2002
 And here are the listener results.

Thanks to those who participated!

-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.

 

You're missing the control!, posted on May 26, 2019 at 08:34:48
jedrider
Audiophile

Posts: 15168
Location: No. California
Joined: December 26, 2003
 You need to include the original 16/44 Redbook material.

Without a control, you're conclusions have no basis.

 

RE: a paradigm change is indicated, posted on June 1, 2019 at 15:20:08
LtMandella
 great book!

 

I don't see the relevance, posted on June 4, 2019 at 10:03:41
audioengr
Manufacturer

Posts: 6017
Location: Oregon
Joined: April 12, 2001
 If the systems are different in every case and only the sources are changing, then each system is a filter for the sound quality. Everything from the DAC and reclocking to the preamp and cables will affect the results.

It's a great exercise in comparing apples to oranges IMO. Futile, and the results are uninteresting.

 

Page processed in 0.040 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]