So, was the opamp testing data conversion at 16-bits or 24-bits? If at 24-bits, how did the test files get to be 16-bit?
The test files posted are in 16-bits. The reason is that the most silent part of the original track is about -60dBFS (attached), so there is no reason for 24-bits and wasting web space.
I am preparing a web page with more detailed description, but it will be posted on Friday afternoon when the poll will be finished. I would like to try to get something from the votes and not to disclose everything before the poll ends. Please feel free to upsample / resample to 24 bits in case your D/A converter works better then.
Attachments
Ah! The bass reminded me of mosfet sound but i wasn't aware of existence of mosfet opamp.
It's amusing that circuits with DC response as well as enormous gain at low frequencies have these "bass" differences.
I think no special need for you to waste time with the foobar ABX, as it is IMO impossible to get repeated and thus statistically valid positive result from these files. Thank you for participating in this thread, anyway.
It depends on what kind of differences you are expecting. You need to focus on smoothness or timing between several notes. Easier is plucked string. Listening to something like that will tell you not only that clips are different but usually you will know which one is right and which one is wrong because music is about timing after all.
Maybe with these players conf:
foobar2000, J River and others sound better in my sustems with Kernel streaming. Remember, I have an ODAC. I used foobar2000 to play the test files.
-> https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_out_ks
and Buffer length (foo/output/): 60 ms
J River/Options/Audio/Device settings Buffer: 0.06s
Only I use ASIO4All with Bug head player, with 512 samples.
And the W10 is very optimized to play multimedia too.
foobar2000, J River and others sound better in my sustems with Kernel streaming. Remember, I have an ODAC. I used foobar2000 to play the test files.
-> https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_out_ks
and Buffer length (foo/output/): 60 ms
J River/Options/Audio/Device settings Buffer: 0.06s
Only I use ASIO4All with Bug head player, with 512 samples.
And the W10 is very optimized to play multimedia too.
The four are almost sample to sample aligned. Two plays of the same LP have real timing differences an order of magnitude larger. Depending on TT and LP it is easy to play the same song twice and have 10's of ms difference in length. That is by some folks measure all listening tests involving LP's should be a waste of time.
Last edited:
Just for fun 😀 (our Mickey)
https://www.analogplanet.com/content/do-tonearm-cables-make-sonic-difference-you-decide
Expensive tonearms, cables ....
And the result? Surface noise, clicks, pops, distortion, time differences. Headphones are like a magnifying lens. Love those stories about vinyl perfection. Look at the spectrum. 30kHz - 40kHz garbage and resonances ...
Last edited:
Excellent 🙂
I would like to post my impressions first (as I don't think any more results will come in at this late hour).
I would like to post my impressions first (as I don't think any more results will come in at this late hour).
Pavel: thanks for the fremer link. Mad Mikey always comes up trumps with his leagues of followers. 🙂
You are welcome, Bill. If that vinyl capture (through 4 super cables) is considered "high quality sound", then I am the Virgin of Orleans 🙂
Go on, Karl! 🙂. No problem.
OK 🙂
(and its no good after the event because anyone can say 'well actually I did prefer xyz etc)
And so I will add my notes that I scribbled down while listening...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...her-big-opamp-listening-test.html#post5104319
aa = was the one that I kept coming back to.
bb = this seemed the odd one out.
cc = a little lifeless.
dd = constrained.
I voted for aa and yet it was bb that seemed to have the best hf detail and shimmer. To close to call, yes, but notwithstanding that the Foobar results seemed to show it was possible to differentiate 'something'. I didn't do 100's of runs and pick the best selectively, I concentrated intently and that was when it seemed possible to get some kind of result.
(and its no good after the event because anyone can say 'well actually I did prefer xyz etc)
And so I will add my notes that I scribbled down while listening...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...her-big-opamp-listening-test.html#post5104319
aa = was the one that I kept coming back to.
bb = this seemed the odd one out.
cc = a little lifeless.
dd = constrained.
I voted for aa and yet it was bb that seemed to have the best hf detail and shimmer. To close to call, yes, but notwithstanding that the Foobar results seemed to show it was possible to differentiate 'something'. I didn't do 100's of runs and pick the best selectively, I concentrated intently and that was when it seemed possible to get some kind of result.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.