If the measurement gear was set up in a sophisticated enough way so that the readings correlated to how the ear/brain registered "quality" then there wouldn't be a problem. However, this has not be done as yet, as far as I'm aware; so the fallback is the hearing system. My own experience is that there is a plateau of quality possible with audio gear, which probably doesn't correlate well with any conventional test readings, and which is good enough for me. So far I've been able to reach that plateau on a regular basis by using engineering skills in solving theoretical and practical issues, I don't need readings from an instrument to "prove" to myself that it's better, though I'm sure that if I did plenty of times there would indeed be better numbers ..
Frank
the bits dont care thats why we have digital and why it is so prevelant these days, from source right up to the DAC, if the bit pattern is the same the data is EXACTLY the same, no difference whatso ever. Thats why we store data in digital format!!!!!!!!!
To paraphrase:
its so wrong that I dont know where to start...
Martin Colloms and many others now, do not agree with you.
Not only can 2 .wav files with identical check sums sound a little different,
3 .wav files with identical check sums can sound a little different to each other! This was also verified very recently in a U.K. based forum as a result of 3 uploaded rips of the same .wav file.
Kethel ripping results second session - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum
The device that performs the playback, say the PC, has a different sequence of electrical activity occurring for the two files. If one were to apply logic probes to numerous points on the motherboard and record every single logic state transition for the entire track, for the two files, they would be two quite different records. If you then accept that electrical activity in the digital side of things could possibly influence the analogue quality via all the usual suspects then you have the recipe for varying playback.
The "physics of everything" means exactly that: on the second playback the suspension of the speakers or headphones has warmed up a bit more, all the capacitors around the DAC are a touch more "conditioned". Yes, yes, this is all very subtle, but if one is busting to pick up a difference then this is how the little "clues" can be there.
Frank
The "physics of everything" means exactly that: on the second playback the suspension of the speakers or headphones has warmed up a bit more, all the capacitors around the DAC are a touch more "conditioned". Yes, yes, this is all very subtle, but if one is busting to pick up a difference then this is how the little "clues" can be there.
Frank
Accuracy is not the problem, it's relevance: if buying tomatoes the scale measured the colour rather than weight then the customer would be scratching his head. Audio gear with excellent "measurements" often does not create pleasing sound, so the customer again scratches his head ...
Frank
We are discussing the possibility of bit identical files sounding different, not any noise problems, the link provided stated that though the recorded bit pattern was the same they sounded different due to better power supploies in the ripping equipement. This would mean by deduction that somehow this noise has been recorded with the bit pattern, how, when during playback the data will pass through many intermediate storage buffers, cache, DDR etc and at each stage the data is recreated.
That is the claim, and so I would like to know by what mechanism this is happening.
That is the claim, and so I would like to know by what mechanism this is happening.
You slightly missed the point, but I actually agree with your statement, "I don't need readings from an instrument to "prove" to myself that it's better" because it is without any accepted definitions. If the purpose of audio gear is to "create pleasing sound" then you can have no criticism of my system... it's not intended to please you.
You seem to equate that with noise/distortion. I don't.
At the physical level this can't happen, take an extreme variation: someone transcribes the whole data file to paper, using a pencil to write an enormous sequence of of 0's and 1's, over vast piles of paper. Then, picks up the phone, calls someone in London and over many months reads off the sequence to someone who again writes it all down on paper. Finally, someone punches it into a hex editor to save a perfect copy of the original file. Everybody has collapsed with exhaustion, but have we captured the qualities of the different origins of the files ...?
Frank
I would not use the link above to support your claims. I did go and read it and it may actually disprove your point. It seems not too many people did the download and test the files, but some of the ones who did found no difference! There was thread here a while ago with a similar claim, if you ripped a cd in MS Windoze safe mode vs ripping the same cd in "regular" mode, the two files were identical but somehow the "safe mode" files sounded better. I did that test (since the amount of time to be wasted was minimal) and found no difference in the sound of the two identical files. Others in this thread I think also did the test and didn't find any differences either.
wow you guys are such suckers, the burden of proof is light with that crowd. not everything is black and white, bit perfectness IS black and white.
files are identical = files are identical, file captures low level noise = files are non-identical.
is it really that hard to grasp the difference between the electrical conditions during file playback and the actual digital file playback? if there are aliens out there monitoring transmissions; theyve already picked their subjects
files are identical = files are identical, file captures low level noise = files are non-identical.
is it really that hard to grasp the difference between the electrical conditions during file playback and the actual digital file playback? if there are aliens out there monitoring transmissions; theyve already picked their subjects
Last edited:
IF you accept that noise can be injected into the analogue from the digital circuitry operating, then the waveform of the two sequences of noise will not be identical; if you believe that the analogue quality is audibly 100% impervious to interference effects then they should sound the same.
Frank
Marce
Since then, I have provided comparison .wav files with even more obvious differences in SQ, to members of another forum. One of the members didn't have suitable PC playback, so he burned the.wav files to a CD and played them through his CD player . He accurately identified the same differences between files as I hear.If you think this is too far fetched, then consider that the Sony BluSpec comparison CDs also have identical check sums yet sound quite different when played by a CD player or a DVD Rom. The differences are NOT due to faulty error correction in the players. I have used tracks mainly from the Sony BluSpec comparison sets to highlight these differences.The better sounding rips are from the Blue Laser created version.
The HFC link that I provided was one of 4 separate threads from 19/8/2011 to 30-1/2012. The 6 separate Blind A/B/A/ 3 minute listening sessions were spread over this period.
I am quite happy to demonstrate these things directly to any Sydney member who doesn't have a completely closed mind,from my PC and headphone amplifier,or 2 specially burned comparison CDs through an Oppo 981 DVD player and speakers.
Alex
Yes. The bits can be stored via optical, magnetic, solid-state, or graphite and wood pulp storage mediums. The 0's are still 0's and 1's are still 1's.
The first claim is nonsense. The second claim is absolutely true, but has zero to do with the electronics and everything to do with your brain (note that CNC and industrial robots function).
CD playback is not valid in this experiment, it adds to many varibles, not the leat the playback of CD's isn't always optimal.
The nose of a PC will not change that much, and if it does solutions toi noise can be easily engineered in or solved by isolation.
The claim is noise is recorded with the data, as part of the digital system, how?
The nose of a PC will not change that much, and if it does solutions toi noise can be easily engineered in or solved by isolation.
The claim is noise is recorded with the data, as part of the digital system, how?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.