All my systems have this marvellous invention called a volume knob. This adjusts my volume and the computer leaves well alone. You should try on one day.
How, look at the PDFs.
I've opened document in open office and word and they look the same, monitor resolution is not a factor in the document just the number of pixels you get on screen. If I open a picture in Lightroom or photoshop it looks the same.
Hi Joel.
The highs are neither bright nor dull, just nicely realistic and subjectively flat and extended.
Nature sounds and simply mic'd programme especially so.
Harsh recordings are presented matter of factly and without that added 'bite' that is far too commonly so.
I have made some mechanical changes to the speakers..ie different internal damping arrangement and different internal speaker wiring, but the amp/crossover modules are deliberately factory virgin.
The mods in question are loosely along the lines of BQP....holidays start Monday so a few weeks of close investigation/measurement are in the works shortly.
Dan.
In these comments of players sounding different, is this with internal sound stage, or with external USB sound card ?.
Further, has anybody checked that the output signal polarity is not different according to the player used ?.
Polarity inversion will cause different sound, and is a possible element here.
Dan.
Further, has anybody checked that the output signal polarity is not different according to the player used ?.
Polarity inversion will cause different sound, and is a possible element here.
Dan.
One example is how fonts are replaced by the system fonts. They are not always encapsulated in the file. You can see this when some letters can be replaced by a wrong one.
The processing could be font,numbers,font,numbers. With the font of your compter being used in constructing the image.
Last edited:
Software and processing was your original view, not bits missing from the system... Music files contain all the required data so only looking at other digital data files with all info embedded is relevant.
I open pictures, STEP files, IGES files, DXF, DWG, Gerber, ODB++, Solidworks 3D, Inventor 3D files in a variety of packages, the file content looks the same, the drawing print out the same, PCBs created from Gerber or ODB++ information by different front end packages are the same...
Internal sound cards.
Hmmm... never checked that. But this is not a one time experience. AIMP3 player is worse. I mean, it cannot just be about polarity.
It may well pay to check that polarity is indeed preserved/same.
It would also be worthwhile to use an audio editor to create two files the same but one inverted and use these two files when comparing players.
Vocals in particular will sound different according to polarity...correct polarity sounds 'correct', and inverted sounds wrong....experiment and learn the subjective difference.
Dan.
The point I am trying to make is that the processing and the results can differ because of the layers of software used. The doc examples were more to demonstrait the complexity, it is more than file to output.
I disagree sorry, I have complex software open every day on my work PC it does not differ however many software packages I have open... The only time data is changed is if I alter it some way.
As to audio packages sounding different, then the data stream will be different easy to confirm I would have thought. If the software is just reading a file and streaming data then it should be the same, if it is changing it then it can be figured out how and why, this data integrity is why we use computers for so much data storage and manipulation these days.....
As to audio packages sounding different, then the data stream will be different easy to confirm I would have thought. If the software is just reading a file and streaming data then it should be the same, if it is changing it then it can be figured out how and why, this data integrity is why we use computers for so much data storage and manipulation these days.....
I have an agfa accuset film imagesetter and it does substitute fonts with unexpected results when printing from Windows systems. Not that this is a good example for audio.
Last edited:
What a load of nonsense in the last few pages. It was already well established that the player software is irrelevant if the system is properly configured for bit-perfect playback. So then why discuss volume control and all this other nonsense?
If the volume control, tone control, EQ, etc. works in your player software, you do not have a bit-perfect configuration and your comments here are completely out of place. Discussing apples vs. oranges is a waste of time.
Furthermore, it is not "impossible" to know what is going on with the bits inside a computer. It is quite the opposite, in fact. There is no mystery whatsoever. No "ghost in the machine".
A software music player has 3 core functions; read data from a music file, decode and/or convert to a PCM bit stream, dump the bit stream to the audio hardware output device. If the OS and player are configured correctly, the audio hardware receives the data, bit by bit, PRECISELY as it is in the original file. If the file format is lossless, then the bits are identical to that of the original media.
Therefore, anyone who discusses at length the differences in the sound of software players is displaying their inability to understand and configure their operating system and player(s). When configured properly, they will all sound identical because the bit stream delivered to the audio hardware will be identical.
Now the subjectivists and digital skeptics can either continue to make nonsense arguments or they can go and do some googling on how to achieve bit-perfect playback with their choice of OS and player(s).
Bit-perfect playback is not the "alpha and omega" (as one local member quipped) but without it, all bets are off and the discussions of PC-based digital audio are completely meaningless and nonsensical.
If the volume control, tone control, EQ, etc. works in your player software, you do not have a bit-perfect configuration and your comments here are completely out of place. Discussing apples vs. oranges is a waste of time.
Furthermore, it is not "impossible" to know what is going on with the bits inside a computer. It is quite the opposite, in fact. There is no mystery whatsoever. No "ghost in the machine".
A software music player has 3 core functions; read data from a music file, decode and/or convert to a PCM bit stream, dump the bit stream to the audio hardware output device. If the OS and player are configured correctly, the audio hardware receives the data, bit by bit, PRECISELY as it is in the original file. If the file format is lossless, then the bits are identical to that of the original media.
Therefore, anyone who discusses at length the differences in the sound of software players is displaying their inability to understand and configure their operating system and player(s). When configured properly, they will all sound identical because the bit stream delivered to the audio hardware will be identical.
Now the subjectivists and digital skeptics can either continue to make nonsense arguments or they can go and do some googling on how to achieve bit-perfect playback with their choice of OS and player(s).
Bit-perfect playback is not the "alpha and omega" (as one local member quipped) but without it, all bets are off and the discussions of PC-based digital audio are completely meaningless and nonsensical.
Last edited:
If incorrect polarity happens only with one channel, the effect is so huge and intolerable.
For absolute polarity, there is no guarantee that every part of the audio chain, including the recording, have correct polarity. The effect is audible, but "sounds wrong"?? May be a little, with most recording. With some other recordings, the incorrect polarity may sound better.
What I have noticed, the effect is most noticeable in bass performance.
Think about speaker design... With second order filter such as LR2, there is phase different between tweeter and woofer such that one driver is usually inverted. Which one to be inverted? Just to preserve equal phase you can do either the woofer or tweeter. But to get better bass it is preferable imo to invert the tweeter.
Same case with 3-way speakers, where it is rarely you can wire the 3 drivers with the same polarity. I always choose to wire the bass driver with positive polarity. But be aware that not all woofers are manufactured with correct polarity.
But you know what, I always try my best so I can wire my speaker drivers entirely with positive polarity.
Cogitech, I am convinced that most people don't known how to setup their computer and to confirm it is done to the level you have done, this is including myself.
Last edited:
You are right, of course. But you know what, IMO, unless your expertize is in computing (like me or BigE), you don't have a right to say/think so 😉
What if the "configuration" is hard coded? And even if OS and player are configured correctly (assuming they are capable of it) the decoded file doesn't have to be similar to the file before encoding.
Have you seen source codes (in C) of an audio player? IME, amateur programmers make mistakes.
I don't understand what you mean.
What I'm saying is, if you are an expert in computer, you will know what others don't, so what other people think as "ghost" is not really a ghost to you. But at the same time, when you know a lot about computer, you will know the "havoc" around it, which other people don't...
So it is IMO fine if you say either "computer is perfect" or " computer is havoc". Having first hand empirical experience is never the same with reading books.
You can trace the bits in a computer from the sectors of the hard drive through the HD controller along the traces on the PCB through the processor and to the memory or directly to memory if DMA used, it has to be this way so that the low level programming works... Computers (processors) are just fancy switches with numerous paths that perform certain functions of bits of information and move information around, all traceable... it has to be to work.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.