Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2012 21:57:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 22, 2012 22:37:24 GMT
That first post by the philosopher was most interesting. I'm sympathetic to the DBT testing method if all things can be made equal except one thing, and that one thing lends itself to a comparison. But if I read him correctly, when that one thing is very complex like a music track, merely hearing a difference might not tell you much unless there is enough information to make a good judgement. And I wonder too, if let's say, system 'A' is identical to system 'B' or there is only one system and we're switching between track 'A' and track 'B', and a small difference is detected -- could there be biasing factors in the system that if those factors are adjusted -- that the result could shift the preference for track 'A' to track 'B'?
Now of course if track 'B' were clearly defective then you would not expect that adjusting the system would ever favor track 'B', but if it did happen it would not be the strangest thing I ever heard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2012 0:47:12 GMT
Dale Quite often , experienced listeners will tell you it's more of a feeling when you listen to complete tracks while relaxed. One track might for example, start your feet tapping and the other track won't. Then comes the hard part of homing in on the differences that make you feel that way. Regards Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2012 19:43:50 GMT
It's a religion thing.
Those that advocate (proper) blind tests swear by it. Others don't and swear by subjective testing.
Some like coffee, some don't. fact of life.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 25, 2012 21:28:57 GMT
Tyll over at Innerfidelity has a new posting - a conversation with Steve Guttenberg about objective -vs- subjective testing. Mostly the same old nonsense but still a good refresher on how opinion is formed. My view is since nothing in real listening is absolute, I mostly react and judge by comparison. If what I hear on one track is smoother but also more spacious, I'm likely to favor it unless some other factor kills it. I have several headphones that sound very different from each other, but I have a lot of tracks that I prefer on all of these headphones. I also have a few tracks that I like a lot on certain 'phones but not so much with others. The difference between these two groups (plays well with all and plays well with some) gives me a good idea where the lines fall between recorded quality and the headphones' reproduction quality. Not a very exact science, but still a good way to evaluate where the improvements are most needed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 1:09:15 GMT
Because the results in the vast majority of cases have been skewed in their favour ! Just like the infamous results from years ago that claimed that "all well engineered amplifiers" MUST sound the same. Yet here we have people like Frans, having "2 bob each way" by incorporating super low noise regulation in the CH.Amp , despite the PSRR specs etc. given by the manufacturers of the I.C.s used. ;D (Not, that I disagree with what he has done in his highly thought out and versatile design.Perhaps he should have a discussion with "his evil twin" and show him how his design isn't quite what he claims for it ? )
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 5:33:21 GMT
Oh... the evil twin found it totally un-warranted/needed and more likely to degrade performance than increase it. Nothing wrong with using good regulators in a design eventhough it is overkill and like many things are not even audible. You ask, we deliver kind of a thing. You say results are skewed in their favor and indeed in tests it appears (conducted by audio engineers and audiphiles) they could not tell the differences in many cases. In this case only one thing remains.... ignore the results/tests, afterall the hearing is SO much better/more sensitive. The differences are sometimes immediate, then they are not, sometimes very obvious sometimes marginal. Always in the same 'category' yet even when blindingly obvious they cannot be told apart when blind tested with statistical relevance... why would that be ?... ah stress... that must be it. a nice theory that has a lot of followers. What puzzles me is WHY they not seem to be able to tell differences (between a lot of audio things) when ONLY the knowing part is taken out and statistical relevance is applied in the tests that further can be absolutely the same as tests they see as 'evidence'. fact of life I am afraid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 6:32:10 GMT
That's bullshit based on from when you still had hair, and SS designs were back in their infancy ! The Professor hit the nail on the head without being an audiophool!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 6:55:51 GMT
yeah yeah .. always bullshit... I know. I am terribly wrong, ignorant, outdated on info, closed minded, only know technical nonsense that does not apply to audio (which differs from normal electronics), do not know what audio is really about, have no ears, do not have revealing enough equipment, am biased, thought police alike and whatnot. It's a burdon I have to take with me on my journey in life. My fault.. my bad... sorry for that. ;D Ofcourse you are right Alex. Why do you post these 'provocative' threads anyway, other than to reinforce your guru status and prove more people like the world the way you see it ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 7:32:15 GMT
Frans I simply posted a link without any comment. YOU are the only one that has complained here. Members are entitled to read other points of view, and make their own decisions. YOU are the one seeking Guru status with your numerous new designs that are available as commercial for PROFIT kits. This is not in line with what RG stands for. It is being slowly turned into another HeadFi. Whether these designs are sought after by members or not, is beside the point. You are using your position in this Forum to promote commercial, for profit designs, where other designers/manufacturers do not have this advantage. Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 7:49:19 GMT
Exactly my point as well so I posted a reply so people can make up their own minds after seeing BOTH viewpoints and not just yours. I have NOT made any money on the designs I posted. In fact RG has only COST me money, I don't complain about it either as it's a hobby and a hobby COSTS money. If that's how the admins feel I will stop posting about any designs Jeremy sells. He hasn't made money on it yet, only has investments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 8:07:30 GMT
I didn't post any comment there initially. Members should be able to read the complete thread at the link provided and reach their own conclusions. If members decide to post their own comments there after viewing the thread, then that is their right. What particularly irks me recently, is that even when I take a small dig at you, and then give a genuine vote of confidence in your designs,even praising them as superior to that of "your evil twin", is that you still come back boots and all ! Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 8:38:04 GMT
so having a dig and praising the same individual cancels out and doesn't create 'irks' ?
What I meant with 'why posting what you post' is everyone on this forum already has seen/read our 'debates' or should I say 'battles' and is well aware of BOTH testing methods and why we both prefer one over the other. There doesn't seem to be another reason than your 'confirmation' to post the link.
Since the OP's conclusion is in your religion's court it merely seems you posted to 'prove your point' not to inform people that similar threads/conclusions are present on other fora as well and are interesting to read.
Nothing to do with boots, irks someone may have and one good deed deserves another or having dig's IMHO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 10:13:11 GMT
IMHO the professor's post was completely illogical.
Keep up the good posts Fran, I can actually understand your posts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 10:28:44 GMT
You are attempting to deny people access to information giving a fresh viewpoint from a Professor of Psychology, simply because you do not agree with it. As far as my posting anything that supports my point of view, why shouldn't I be able to do so, when views like your own are heavily reinforced in other forums, and anybody who dares to disagree is attacked by groups of members , who set about to ridicule the person concerned, usually with loads of sarcasm. That also happened recently with Erin in DIYAudio when he attempted to post his own findings about ripping CDs with Windows in Safe Mode.Like as so often happens here, the moderators locked the thread. Erin was quite effectively silenced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 10:49:07 GMT
Greg That is your viewpoint, and you are entitled to it. However, after just revisiting the thread, it would appear that some very qualified members in C.A. did not find it illogical as you do. A few may not have agreed with it, but they certainly did not appear to find it illogical.In fact, the thread was quite a nice exchange of different viewpoints. Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 11:16:52 GMT
You are attempting to deny people access to information giving a fresh viewpoint from a Professor of Psychology, simply because you do not agree with it. Nope... I don't see any attempts on my part to deny people reading other sites. In fact I applaude such when BOTH sides of a medal can be viewed on that particular site. I am not anything like the Chinese governement either, that has a mandate/ability to block certain sites so their inhabitants can't access certain info they don't like them to see. What possible 'professional' information can a professor in psychology have about audio, perception and electronics other than his personal experiences as he does not seem educated in those specific areas ? As far as my posting anything that supports my point of view, why shouldn't I be able to do so, when views like your own are heavily reinforced in other forums, and anybody who dares to disagree is attacked by groups of members , who set about to ridicule the person concerned, usually with loads of sarcasm. I am experiencing a small deja-vu here, reading your reply about someone being 'attacked' . It looks quite similar to 'attacks' by two individuals, who shall not be named, in certain threads where that someone (could that be me ?) was attacked and ridiculed with loads of sarcasm in more than one occasion ? You are perfectly free to post whatever you like, just as free as I am to post my (or my technical) point of view that may or may not be opposing but is always sincere and NOT posted merely for the goal of stating something is black when others say it's white. I feel I don't have to say much more so will leave this thread alone from now. Both our viewpoints are known... and yes ... you are right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 11:46:02 GMT
I suggest that you re-read the thread that you appear to be referring to, and you will see that I wasn't the one being sarcastic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 14:27:47 GMT
I guess I am just imagining it then... or misinterpreting words/sentences. Sorry... for that.
anyway.. this has nothing to do with blind testing.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 26, 2012 19:49:34 GMT
From a neutral corner on this, my big disappointment was realizing that I couldn't duplicate another person's test conditions since files transmitted across the Internet get filtered in several interesting ways, even though the contents have the same checksum (suggesting they should be identical).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 20:58:47 GMT
You are attempting to deny people access to information giving a fresh viewpoint from a Professor of Psychology. Small point of correction, he is a philosophy professor. Big difference between philosophy and Psychology, but I understand it is just a typo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 21:09:15 GMT
.... since files transmitted across the Internet get filtered in several interesting ways, even though the contents have the same checksum (suggesting they should be identical). Hi dalethorn, Can you tell me what these special filters are? I understand there are spam filters, adult content filters, virus filters, you can also filter out protocols at routers, firewalls etc, but I am unaware of any special filters that modify audio files. regards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2012 21:36:01 GMT
Dale Using Uncompressed Zips for transmission appears to have in the main overcome the degradation problem.I currently have a Zipped DL for a HFC member to compare with earlier DLs of the same track. Alex
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 26, 2012 22:46:02 GMT
Hi dalethorn, Can you tell me what these special filters are? I understand there are spam filters, adult content filters, virus filters, you can also filter out protocols at routers, firewalls etc, but I am unaware of any special filters that modify audio files. regards I don't think there are any *special* filters - none that we don't already know about. It's just that we don't ever think about all of the other things besides a file's contents. The file header stored by the O/S, the method of allocation of the contents on the disc or other media, various other things. If I send a file to six people, and each one of them does a "save as" to their computer using the same filename, that eliminates one factor of difference, but not others. Here's a tiny example: I run a crypto contest occasionally offering $15k USD free to any organization that wants to break a simple program I developed. It's a "chosen plaintext attack" contest. In the simplest implementation I used the filenames as part of the encryption - i.e. a passcode modifier or randomizer. One contestant tried to get around my scheme by fixing the names of the files he sent me in a way that gave him a leg up in cracking the code. You might assume the filename of a music track would make absolutely no difference to the playback, and you might be right. But that's one little thing on one computer. You start mixing in other factors and computers, and even when the checksummed contents are the same, you may get differences.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 26, 2012 23:02:49 GMT
Dale Using Uncompressed Zips for transmission appears to have in the main overcome the degradation problem.I currently have a Zipped DL for a HFC member to compare with earlier DLs of the same track. Alex That may indeed force something to occur in the transmission that keeps the bits ordered a certain way when written to the destination disc. Now the checksum program will of course use the Operating System facilities to get the bits from the file in the order that the FAT or NTFS etc. table says is the correct order, and thus the checksum will be consistent, the same each time hopefully. But while the music players certainly would also depend on the O/S to read the data in the correct order as well, certain anomalies are possible. The older programming languages like 'C' offered several methods of reading data, not just one. Buffers come into play also, and while you would expect that a modern O/S like Windows or Mac to have resolved all possible buffer conflicts long ago, I can tell you that our database systems like SQL Server and Pervasive SQL for PC's are not 100 percent perfect in that regard - and I'm not talking about transaction processing either - just the ordinary stuff. SQL systems gain a lot of performance by grabbing a lot of sequential stored data that may be discarded when it extracts what it needs from the stream it reads. Some of those systems may use drive access methods that are lower level than what a file allocation table would support reliably. I can't prove anything there without a bunch of research to get article links, but the principle is valid. If your computer is a good performer, your software would not have to resort to unusual methods to read and write data, but that doesn't mean that your software would automatically scale up to a more reliable method just because more power is available.
|
|