Well, I have done that sort of thing - and the noise I'm hearing from the Yamaha does correlate quite well with the artifacts you get by grossly discarding bits - the sound artifacts are very subtle, unless you actively listen for it it won't be apparent.
I have a CBS CD of female operatic arias, one of the first I bought - and it is one of the very few we have that show sloppy engineering in this regard: the start of the very first track is very soft - the whole album has been mastered at very low volumes, meaning the volume is right up to play it - and there is very distinct quantisation noise at that beginning section. I ripped the track, and sure enough, a very distinct staircase volume envelope to the background noise at that point - something that slipped past the QC ...
I have a CBS CD of female operatic arias, one of the first I bought - and it is one of the very few we have that show sloppy engineering in this regard: the start of the very first track is very soft - the whole album has been mastered at very low volumes, meaning the volume is right up to play it - and there is very distinct quantisation noise at that beginning section. I ripped the track, and sure enough, a very distinct staircase volume envelope to the background noise at that point - something that slipped past the QC ...
Julf the article you linked three times about fishing techniques or forest Neanderthals was just some scientist upset at all the climate change talk, much of which is "anti science" and in mainstream newspapers.
I don't think these people are "trolling" him, they have positive intentions.
Honestly all people care about is if climate change is real or not. Some institutions have vested interests and most scientists are incapable of saying "Actually, I'm not sure" and have to present everything like it's cast in Iron.
Scientists in cover-up of ?damaging? climate view | The Times
Edit - Math, Chemistry, EE etc. is mostly cast in Iron, difficult to "hide evidence" there I suspect =)
I don't think these people are "trolling" him, they have positive intentions.
Honestly all people care about is if climate change is real or not. Some institutions have vested interests and most scientists are incapable of saying "Actually, I'm not sure" and have to present everything like it's cast in Iron.
Scientists in cover-up of ?damaging? climate view | The Times
Edit - Math, Chemistry, EE etc. is mostly cast in Iron, difficult to "hide evidence" there I suspect =)
Last edited:
I think Greiner covered this in a well controlled test. Arny are you lurking?
You seem not to understand what fast switching means in a abx context.
All it means is that when the switching occurs it should be really fast, not that the switching back and forth be happening all the time.
In fact, in an abx test the listener can listen to the equipment being tested as long as he wants : the switching only happens when he wants.
Enviado de meu GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk
Unfortunately it needs to be inaudible or at least randomly related to the inputs, not always done.
Yes, that as well. Also, the amplifiers have to be level matched to 0.1dB SPL, which is something that is rarely done by non-researchers.
Ah, Leif Erikson, for example. I wasn't aware there was any attempt at covering that up.
It can take a year pause, if the listener so desires.
But, as acoustic memory fades really quickly, you'd like to allow the quickest switching possible to preserve most of your sound memory. In other words, the possibility of a fast switch aids in the identification of sound differences in the equipments being tested.
If, for any reason, the person who is doing the listening doesn't like fast switching (ie: his religious beliefs say that audio memory gets better, not worse, as time passes) he/she can take as long as (s)he likes switching.
It appears like they may have been teaching directly from the Icelandic sagas in that case =)
Norse colonization of the Americas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The question was definitively settled in the 1960s when a Norse settlement was excavated at L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland by archaeologist Anne Stine Ingstad and her husband, outdoorsman and author Helge Ingstad"
Unless Wiki is incorrect, which happens
Edit - Indeed there is no apostrophe in "1960s"
Indeed, or not switch at all, if I can appreciate a DAC sighted, I better be able to appreciate it blind, after all, my audio system needs no visual information at all.
I don't suspect volume memory could possibly "improve", I can hardly even hear 1 dB volume change in an immediate Foobar ABX switch, it took me a while to notice it, at least 10 minutes of messing around.
Edit - It may have been less than 1 dB, need to recheck that test.
Anyway, cegadede, it's about deletion, we delete sensory input, not only remember it, so during the switch, if our mind decides it's right, then it may delete the sound difference during the switch, this is fully automatic and pre-conscious.
Do you follow me now?
Anyway, cegadede, it's about deletion, we delete sensory input, not only remember it, so during the switch, if our mind decides it's right, then it may delete the sound difference during the switch, this is fully automatic and pre-conscious.
Do you follow me now?
Perhaps you missed this...
"For the centenary of the first official immigration of Norwegians to America, President Calvin Coolidge stated at the 1925 Minnesota State Fair, to a crowd of 100,000 people, that Leif had indeed been the first European to discover America."
What do you propose : that switching take longer (ie: a long silence between tests) or shorter?
Enviado de meu GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk
If the sound system has enough non linear distortion, you will hear stuff.
Lots of tube amps will give positive results on this test. Probably it'll work with a laptop to, just speculating though....
I suppozest (suppose and suggest) longer, something like 1 to 7 seconds, I'm not really sure.
Plus rewinding / clicking the track to the start.
Here you have a reference
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100601072644.htm
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.04.014
"Using this fairly simple protocol, the scientists discovered that our ear is remarkably effective in detecting noise repetitions. Listeners nearly always recognized the noise pattern that had been played several times; two listenings were enough for those with a trained ear, and only about ten for less experienced ears. Sound repetition therefore induces both extremely rapid and effective learning, which occurs implicitly (it is not supervised). In addition, this memory for noise can last several weeks. A fortnight after the first experiment, volunteers identified the noise pattern again, at first attempt."
Plus this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-attentive_processing
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.