Hires 96/24 listening test of opamps - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
View Poll Results: Which of the files do you prefer by listening?
rr 1 11.11%
ss 1 11.11%
tt 2 22.22%
uu 5 55.56%
vv 0 0%
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th June 2017, 02:13 PM   #31
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakob2 View Post
But doing an ABX consisting of a small number of trials is only recommended if the listenerīs detection ability is really good, otherwise the risk of commiting a type 2 error gets unbearable.
To small number of trials can get type 1 errors.
To eliminate type 2 errors, just take your time, take pauses, there's no limit on how much time you should spend. And then you can do 20 trials eliminating both type 1 and type 2 errors.


For preference tests with very small differences, like this test, ABC/HR should be used. BS.1116*:*Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems
__________________
I don't have to think!
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 03:08 PM   #32
DPH is offline DPH  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMA View Post
I received preferences of one of our members by PM, which is in almost perfect correlation with parameters of the op amps used. If anyone else has his opinion as well, please do not hesitate to contact me by PM or e-mail.
Isn't this more alarming than encouraging? Anything with that kind of concordance reads more like someone "listened" with their eyes than with ears.

Jacob- I agree, it's a shame there isn't a foobar plug-in for configurable forced choice testing.
__________________
Happy DIYing, Daniel
(This space is occupied by the artist formerly known as Derfnofred)
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 03:30 PM   #33
PMA is online now PMA  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
PMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Prague
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPH View Post
Isn't this more alarming than encouraging? Anything with that kind of concordance reads more like someone "listened" with their eyes than with ears.
I would not say so. IMO it is quite impossible to say anything from file analysis in this current test. And if he really heard what he describes to me in a PM, then hats off. Of course it is just one test set.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 04:55 PM   #34
DPH is offline DPH  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Fair enough, Pavel. It's one data point and, well, props if it checks out. I clearly have not looked at the files, for a number of reasons. (Laziness being foremost!)
__________________
Happy DIYing, Daniel
(This space is occupied by the artist formerly known as Derfnofred)

Last edited by DPH; 19th June 2017 at 05:00 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 05:08 PM   #35
Mooly is offline Mooly  United Kingdom
diyAudio Moderator
 
Mooly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
I'm more perturbed by the fact that I can't immediately pick what is essentially a 741 from a cluster of better devices. Not quite sure what that is telling me actually......

My current method is to play either the opening or to jump in at a certain point but not to ABX them. I then score them out of 10 giving a middle score of 5 to the first device (simply because it is first in the list) and then marking the others as either same, higher or lower.

When I think I have found a preference for one or more I then put that plus the worst scoring into the ABX procedure and become despondent that the differences melt away.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 05:46 PM   #36
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
Default in AB/X listening test, to me a pairwise comparison is a 'unit'

I mainly listen pairwise in AB/X, A vs B to try to find, fix 'the difference" in my memory then alternate A vs X and X vs B, with A vs B, frequently 'refreshing' listens to A vs B

even when when something seems 'obvious' I test A vs X, B vs X is 'same or different?' rather than just trying X and calling it as A or B
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 06:09 PM   #37
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by milkshake View Post
To small number of trials can get type 1 errors.
An experimenter chooses the significance level at which he wanted to test at first and from there he gets the minimum number of trials needed.

Quote:
To eliminate type 2 errors, just take your time, take pauses, there's no limit on how much time you should spend. And then you can do 20 trials eliminating both type 1 and type 2 errors.
Elimination of both error types isnīt possible, just getting both error risks at the same level (presumably).
While accomodation to the test protocol will probably help a lot, without positive controls the experimenter doesnīt know about the risk of commiting an error of the second kind.

He has to assume several detection probabilities and to do a power calculation under these assumptions.

Quote:
For preference tests with very small differences, like this test, ABC/HR should be used. BS.1116*:*Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems
As said before, ABC/HR is a nice protocol but A/B paired preference comparison well planned and executed is another one.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 06:10 PM   #38
diyAudio Member
 
ashok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 3RS
When do we get to know what the chips are ?

I used a Philips SHP8900 headphone via my sound card which is quite decent.
Tomorrow I will try it again using my Beyer DT990. Maybe play the files via my external DAC / headphone amp.

The differences on the SHP8900 aren't huge but some parts seem distinctly different. Will have to do it all over again and see if I have the same ratings I made in the first round on the SHP8900.
__________________
AM
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 06:11 PM   #39
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
I mainly listen pairwise in AB/X, A vs B to try to find, fix 'the difference" in my memory then alternate A vs X and X vs B, with A vs B, frequently 'refreshing' listens to A vs B

even when when something seems 'obvious' I test A vs X, B vs X is 'same or different?' rather than just trying X and calling it as A or B
Itīs another possibility but no longer an ABX test....
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th June 2017, 06:40 PM   #40
PMA is online now PMA  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
PMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Prague
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashok View Post
When do we get to know what the chips are ?

I used a Philips SHP8900 headphone via my sound card which is quite decent.
Tomorrow I will try it again using my Beyer DT990. Maybe play the files via my external DAC / headphone amp.

The differences on the SHP8900 aren't huge but some parts seem distinctly different. Will have to do it all over again and see if I have the same ratings I made in the first round on the SHP8900.
The poll will close on 27th June. It is written in the poll head.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Audio Streamer for 24/192 or 24/96 options barackuda Digital Source 23 3rd December 2016 02:57 AM
DAC to use for 24/96 at most osd1 Digital Line Level 2 17th August 2013 10:57 PM
2x4 in Box with 24/96 or 24/196 aazeez1975 miniDSP 3 8th July 2011 10:40 AM
Are there any DIP 24/96 or 24/192 ADCs and I2P to FireWire Codecs? BoilermakerFan Digital Source 0 21st July 2008 08:27 PM
24/96 and 24/192 is no good. MP3 sounds better! peranders Digital Source 92 30th July 2002 09:30 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:14 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Wiki