Listening Test. Trying to understand what we think we hear.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#81
As a specific that I used for evaluating - I just tried another quick comparison - the versions B and C for me are mighty close. But, at the beginning there are several runs on the piano keyboard, tinkly notes that should nicely ring out in that distinctive, 'piano way' - B gets that happening quite nicely, but on C there is a layer of dullness, a deadening of the impact of those individual notes, I'm less aware of the "pianoishness" of that sound component ... hence, by that criteria, B pulls in front ...
 
#82
Derfnofred said:
Got the files. 🙂 And thank you for doing this!

My question was more succinct: I was wondering if there were 7 (or more) files where one or more of them were Micromega Stage 2 player > ADC (eliminating the entire opamp chain), as a control (or multiples to confound the testee and see his/her consistency). No worries there isn't--it would have been a very useful end point (more so than a levels matched straight rip of the song as at least it contains any effects of the DAC/ADC) to determine audibility of any/all of these opamp chains and nothing.

Again, I do want to reiterate that I'm very grateful for the test, and that my point is but a minor nit, although perhaps one useful for adding in future experiments.
Click to expand...

Good to know you are enjoying it.

I did actually wonder about doing some kind of control track the way you describe but in the end did not simply because experience has shown that because some use software to analyse these kind of files, any slight differences (such as level change due to differing impedances, even if its 0.05db, or phase differences) are immediately picked out.

You will all have the chance to listen to the rip of the track and compare against that shortly anyway.
 
#83
Well, there's universally the risk (ahem, guarantee) that someone will unblind the experiment and ruin it for others, but informative for those of us who try not to read anyone else's impressions before testing. 🙂

(Again, thanks!)
 
#85
Mooly said:
Edit... files now available HERE

The listening tests we have run in the past have been both fun but also (I hope) informative and insightful. Well I figured it was the turn of opamps again but this time I want to do things very differently. Firstly, I know that being presented with a bunch of files is off putting, and for those of you who are juggling other things in your life, very time consuming.

So what is this test all about and why is it different ?

Well, there has been a resurgence of opamp threads/posts in the last few weeks and I thought it would be a good idea to see if we could really make a real attempt to try and pin sonic differences to a handful of common devices, some highly regarded, others less so. To make the differences stand out (if there are any), the circuit consists of a chain of five identical devices in each channel, each device being wired as a unity gain buffer. To make it even more severe, each of the first four opamps in the chain is loaded with a 390 ohm load. Now lets put that load in perspective. The max peak voltage that each could theoretically see in this test is going to be around -/+3 volts given that a CD player is specified as a nominal 2 vrms output. Give or take. That means peaks of around 7.5ma worst case.

This is the basic circuit.



However, there is more to this test than meets the eye because I'm hoping to see if it ties in or relates to the fact that we sometimes prefer one thing over another simply because we 'know' something must be better, or that we can see what we are listening to and so that influences our choice.

What ! So there's still another zillion files to listen too 😀 No chance.

So here's the plan. All files will made available for those who are keen enough to want to try them all. For those who would like to compare just one or two devices against another (and you can each choose the devices from the list) then I will give you your own personal link to just those files you want to compare. Of course no two of you will get the same file name, I'll randomise each personal set (so you wont be able to compare notes that way 😉)

(We would have to see how all that worked out... because its all extra work and time for me... but for those of you who have been interested in the other tests, well its probably a managable number)

To make it even more interesting... there are no files at all on offer just yet.

Huh ! So how does that work then ?

It works by you being able to look at the list of devices offered and saying how you think they might differ. We have all had it drilled into us over the years how good certain devices are, and how mediocre or downright poor are others. So in the first instance think about what you think you might hear. (You probably have your own ideas, I know I did). Then you can ask for the devices you are interested in and see if the listening reality matches your opinions, and to see if you really can pick one over the other. There is also a level matched .wav rip of the original as something against which a final judgement can be made. That would not be made available until all the initial listening was drawing to a close.

The list.

1/ JRC4560
2/ LM833P
3/ LM4562
4/ NE5532
5/ TLE2072
6/ TL072

So ! What do you all think. Interested ?
Click to expand...

Am I missing something or is there no reference file, that is the musical track that went through no op amps?
 
#89
I didn't find any difference. I know this is opamp character test. So for self evaluation I am taking part. Short clips of all files were quickly played and listened with a break (yesterday and today). I think (not sure to be honest) B sounded right to me compared to the rest. Hope more members take part.
Thanks for the effort and best Regards 🙂
 
#91
sikahr said:
Which player is recommended for listening tests like this?

I want to instantly switch multiple files through playing.
Click to expand...
I've found Audacity to be excellent in this regard, any number of tracks can be imported, an A-B section can be selected and looped, and all tracks muted - a single track on the fly unmuted, and almost instantly switched to another.

Worked very well for me previously - at the moment I'm using MediaMonkey, which can't do this ...
 
#92
arnyk said:
No reference file, no reason to listen.

It's Science 101. The keystone of any test is a fixed reference.

If you disagree, look up the meaning of the word test. ;-)

A test is defined as a comparison to a fixed reference.

No reference file, no test!
Click to expand...

I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be possible to just nominate any one of the six files as a 'test' file and compare the other five against that one. That way you have a fixed reference to compare against.
 
#95
Mooly said:
I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be possible to just nominate any one of the six files as a 'test' file and compare the other five against that one. That way you have a fixed reference to compare against.
Click to expand...

I can't see any reason why a proper reference file couldn't be provided. It obviously exists for the other files to exist.

Doing the proposed comparison involves my time, and if my time and my reading of the proper definition of the word test are worth nothing, then my results would be worth nothing too.

I will then cut to the chase! ;-)
 
Last edited:
#98
sikahr said:
Anyone have expirience with this (googled just now):

ABX audio testing tool
Click to expand...

It is arguably the best tool or as good as the best tool for the job of comparing two files for audible differences. It has been around for a while, it is widely used and generally recognized, and it has been updated to reflect a lot of user experiences.

The installation is very easy and foolproof. The price is right.

The home web site is here: foobar2000

the ABX page on the home web site is here:

foobar2000: Components Repository - ABX Comparator

The author maintains this forum:

Hydrogenaudio Forums -> foobar2000
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom