Member
Joined 2009
Member
Joined 2009
I got my results. I picked 3 versions that sounded better than the rest and one of them was the original but it wasn't my first choice.
It was difficult comparing 8 files, my auditory memory doesn't stick past 2 versions. If the test asked to pick the original from Original-Altered pairs I'm confident that I would've gotten at least 80% right.
As for distinguishing each material I think that is impossible. I was guessing that the metals will do better but that proved wrong.
Having a variety of music was great but for me personally the only distinctive part was the female vocals. A bit telling was the ending of the violin solo but the rest was indistinguishable to me. I find piano, guitar (most strings really), any electronic music and many layers of instruments impossible to evaluate critically. On the other spectrum clean vocals and well recorded drums are the most telling to me.
It was difficult comparing 8 files, my auditory memory doesn't stick past 2 versions. If the test asked to pick the original from Original-Altered pairs I'm confident that I would've gotten at least 80% right.
As for distinguishing each material I think that is impossible. I was guessing that the metals will do better but that proved wrong.
Having a variety of music was great but for me personally the only distinctive part was the female vocals. A bit telling was the ending of the violin solo but the rest was indistinguishable to me. I find piano, guitar (most strings really), any electronic music and many layers of instruments impossible to evaluate critically. On the other spectrum clean vocals and well recorded drums are the most telling to me.
you shouldn't be surprised if you picked an 128 kbps mp3 as the original instead of the uncompressed PCM file
don't feel bad, you're better than average
This particular sensory store is capable of storing large amounts of auditory information that is only retained for a short period of time (3–4 seconds). This echoic sound resonates in the mind and is replayed for this brief amount of time shortly after the presentation of auditory stimuli. Echoic memory encrypts only moderately primitive aspects of the stimuli, for example pitch, which specifies localization to the non association brain regions.
Echoic memory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
try harder. Frank managed on his TV
I concur, I never use piano-based music for evaluation.
Member
Joined 2009
I have no problem with quality MP3s, they sound great to me. I really need to set up an MP3 - WAV test because many of my friends claim they can tell them apart.
I don't think this test requires high-end audio system, just a well-resolving equipment that is familiar to the listener. I'm not surprised that Frank picked out the original on his TV, this has more to do with listener training than the capabilities of the audio system. I listened on KRK KNS6400 headphones plugged directly into an Audigy2 sound card. It's a very well resolving setup but not high-end. I have yet to listen on my main system.
I don't think this test requires high-end audio system, just a well-resolving equipment that is familiar to the listener. I'm not surprised that Frank picked out the original on his TV, this has more to do with listener training than the capabilities of the audio system. I listened on KRK KNS6400 headphones plugged directly into an Audigy2 sound card. It's a very well resolving setup but not high-end. I have yet to listen on my main system.
And yet the piano piece was the most helpful to some others, that's why there is a range. It's hard to pick the tracks as tastes vary - different people listen for different things.
I was thinking that maybe I could group the samples. Say piano + violin. Then drums, then vocals. Each would have the same letter designation. That way you could pick what you like and ignore the rest. Something like this:
Do you think that would make the test easier?
I was thinking that maybe I could group the samples. Say piano + violin. Then drums, then vocals. Each would have the same letter designation. That way you could pick what you like and ignore the rest. Something like this:
- Piano-Original, Piano-Loop, Piano-Mud, etc.
- Voice-Original, Voice-Loop, Voice-Mud
- Drums-Original, Drums-Loop, Drums-Mud
Do you think that would make the test easier?
That's one of the things I like about a test like this - you can't blame the system. You get to listen on your own system, be it good, bad or indifferent. You should be familiar with its qualities.
Also no one can complain about the AD-DA loop being not good enough, as the original file is supplied. If you can't pick the loop from the original, then the loop is good enough. So far it looks like we have some guys who CAN tell the original from a loop, even if they can't tell what the loop is made of. It's encouraging.
How about trying some fine steel wool cut into strips to make it extend over a couple feet with extensive surface rust? That should magnify any surface contact issues.
You can probably add surface rust pretty fast on steel wool by soaking it in some acidic compound like 1 part of muriatic acid diluted with 20 parts of water, removing it from the solution and then rinsing off the acidic solution when you have the amount of rust you want. Full strength muriatic acid (which is fairly condensed hydrochloric acid that is used to etch concrete, etc.) is potentially dangerous, so one must be reasonably careful when using it.
You can probably add surface rust pretty fast on steel wool by soaking it in some acidic compound like 1 part of muriatic acid diluted with 20 parts of water, removing it from the solution and then rinsing off the acidic solution when you have the amount of rust you want. Full strength muriatic acid (which is fairly condensed hydrochloric acid that is used to etch concrete, etc.) is potentially dangerous, so one must be reasonably careful when using it.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Right! It comes to show just how much our ears rely on conditioning. I don't doubt a person who plays the piano will be able to discern even the slightest nuances. It fascinates me that some people can detect so many cues from the piano when sometimes I have trouble telling one kind of piano from another. The way I approached the test was to focus on the vocalist's breathing pattern and the majority of the tracks sound somewhat dull and flat when the air is supposed to rush from her mouth. I'm not confident that I know what a proper piano or a violin is supposed to sound like but I know how people talk.
I gave it a quick listen on my main system and I didn't feel that it improved or diminished my abilities significantly, but oh man, I was reminded that speakers don't resolve as well as headphones! The speakers are still more enjoyable to listen to because of the way they fill the room versus the sound "in your head" so I'm not complaining.
I was OK with the format of the test. I was able to load tracks and skip to the section of interest very quickly (2 mouse clicks) so the format wasn't really a problem. I would hate doing this on a CD player however. What threw me off was the amount of choices. I would compare A to B, then the best one to C and best one to D and so on. But sometimes I would get a tough pair and then I had to do more comparisons so by the time I've listened to the same track 20 times I couldn't tell any of them apart.
This thread is great!
I'm not reading very far because I want to listen to the samples first.
How far does this reach?
Like, can I listen to your system from here?
there's even a lot of salty water in between...
-
I'm not reading very far because I want to listen to the samples first.
How far does this reach?
Like, can I listen to your system from here?
there's even a lot of salty water in between...
-
Yeah, eight is too many. Half that would be plenty. I got a little carried away.
That's a great question. What got me interesting in sending signals thru the earth is the old telegraph lines. They sent signals (just clicks) over 100s of miles on a single wire. The ground was the common point on both ends. IIRC, they used battery voltages in the 90V region. As long as the ground was good, almost all the losses came from the lines.
But I still think we'd need a single wire across the Atlantic to connect our systems. The earth would be the common.
I need one, don't I?
Just to correct this, it wasn't the 'optimised' TV but just a decent, commercial grade, HP desktop computer, using the motherboard's native DAC. A couple of plastic, single driver HK monitors with inbuilt amps were plugged in, the sort of thing everyone has. No tweaking done, apart from running the setup for an hour or so to warm up, condition everything.try harder. Frank managed on his TV
I used a bit of everything on the tracks, but the best all round item is the clip with vocals - listen to the quality of the sibilance and the clarity and tone of the accompanying violin.
Funny but for me it was the cymbals in the last 10 - 20 seconds of the last track. I'm a bit embarrassed that I picked the MUD as the copper, and the copper as the steel wool.
I only chose one other track, which I regarded as the worst, and that turned out to be the salt water. So at least I chose one of the liquids as the worst
It could be fluke that I picked the original, but I did keep coming back to that track as being the best one. One interesting observation though was that it was when I wasn't thinking about it that I seemed to be more likely to notice the difference.
Tony.
I only chose one other track, which I regarded as the worst, and that turned out to be the salt water. So at least I chose one of the liquids as the worst
It could be fluke that I picked the original, but I did keep coming back to that track as being the best one. One interesting observation though was that it was when I wasn't thinking about it that I seemed to be more likely to notice the difference.
Tony.
Not so much a fluke, it stood out clearly as being cleaner than any of the others. Yes, the cymbals in the last track are also very good for help in distinguishing, the track is well recorded, and the drum work stands well apart and distinct in its own acoustic.
Your last comment is right on the money: you're best served using Clayton's listening -- for all you non-Aussies that means, how you listen when you don't listen. In other words, when one tries to force the analytical side of the brain to work it out it the horsepower to do the job is being used in the wrong way - it's madly trying to pick up the correlations, the connections, it over-focuses, and stumbles over its own feet. If, on the other hand, you deliberately relax, go into a "I'm not really bothered about this" mode, then the intuitive side kicks in, and it turns out that that's a lot sharper in making good decisions about sound ...
There, I've given away all the secrets now ...
Your last comment is right on the money: you're best served using Clayton's listening -- for all you non-Aussies that means, how you listen when you don't listen. In other words, when one tries to force the analytical side of the brain to work it out it the horsepower to do the job is being used in the wrong way - it's madly trying to pick up the correlations, the connections, it over-focuses, and stumbles over its own feet. If, on the other hand, you deliberately relax, go into a "I'm not really bothered about this" mode, then the intuitive side kicks in, and it turns out that that's a lot sharper in making good decisions about sound ...
There, I've given away all the secrets now ...
I've also found that to work well. I remember a few years back trying to evaluate the sound of two different DACs in a blind test. Listening intently, I could not tell any difference at all. But then I noticed that with one I was more relaxed and my foot would start tapping along with the music. It took a few rounds to realize that, but it was consistent. Still couldn't really hear the difference, tho.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.