I saw it as I joke. I was just pointing out jokingly that there is one item I would not part with. I'd sell the main rig, but I do draw the line at listening through laptop speakers 🙂
Speaking for myself, I pray every night that I may be relieved from my scientific inclinations.
I do wonder by what authority a decision is made to attach, what I consider to be a ridiculously specific meaning, to two words that everyone understands the meaning of so as to make them unavailable to be used other than in that specific way.
I have just finished listening to Dan’s ‘Uncle Blunt goop files’.
Version 00 - No goop loop. An early acoustic recording of someone playing a violin in an empty room while foot tapping on a beatbox. Most probably an early electrical recording cut direct to shellac disc. The YouTube lossy compression made it sound a bit gritty and quite tiring on the ear.
Version 01 - Loop goop x 1. I could not tell a difference between Version 00 and 01.
Version 02 - Loop goop x 2. I could not tell a difference between Version 01 and 02.
Version 03 - Loop goop x 3. I could not tell a difference between Version 02 and 03 but I thought I can hear a faint difference between Version 03 and 00. The difference being a slight rolling off of the treble and slight lowering of noise floor.
My listening set up is two iPads with identical DACs and headphones, both running simultaneously. I switched from one set of headphones to the other and even though I perceived a slight difference, it was negligible, and if I didn’t know it was a test, I sincerely doubt if there was a difference to be heard.
In other words, I could hear no perceivable difference.
tapestryofsound
Version 00 - No goop loop. An early acoustic recording of someone playing a violin in an empty room while foot tapping on a beatbox. Most probably an early electrical recording cut direct to shellac disc. The YouTube lossy compression made it sound a bit gritty and quite tiring on the ear.
Version 01 - Loop goop x 1. I could not tell a difference between Version 00 and 01.
Version 02 - Loop goop x 2. I could not tell a difference between Version 01 and 02.
Version 03 - Loop goop x 3. I could not tell a difference between Version 02 and 03 but I thought I can hear a faint difference between Version 03 and 00. The difference being a slight rolling off of the treble and slight lowering of noise floor.
My listening set up is two iPads with identical DACs and headphones, both running simultaneously. I switched from one set of headphones to the other and even though I perceived a slight difference, it was negligible, and if I didn’t know it was a test, I sincerely doubt if there was a difference to be heard.
In other words, I could hear no perceivable difference.
tapestryofsound
How is that possible? Me, a stupid technocratic engineer, easily found differences, by listening, between 01 and 02 - The 2 Trumpeters.wav (please call the samples with exact names) , in a DBT, with 100% success, and could repeat it how many times you wished. Think about it guys, especially you who so often speak about your hearing abilities. Maybe it is all different.
The original is 78 of course but a good LP transfer appeared on the Anthology of American Folk Music (I think) with eventual CD release.
Uncle Dave Macon does one a little more "toe tapping" YouTube
There is a progressive slow shelving of the highs that gets to about -0.5dB @10k by version 3 probably considered audible jumping between rev 0 and 3 as you did, rev to rev would be -.1dB or so and probably be a challenge.
The music and...the volume it is played at.
When music is not loud enough, people will not dance.
My favorite theory about this has to do with the startle response. The auditory nerve's first station in the brain is the pons, the most ancient part of the brain, that regulates functions like breathing, but can also initiate the so called startle response. It is the most immediate response we can have to an auditory input and it is there to keep us out of trouble.
Dance in its most primitive form is when this startle response is triggered in a rythmical way and the body is allowed to spontaneously react to it. (It explains why I fall out of rhythm, the moment I try to keep up with my thinking brain.) The sound has to be loud enough to trigger this response.
If you are not interested in trying to be understood for all means ignore accepted definitions and roll your own. However people might misunderstand your reasons for being here 😛
And yet Mark was the only person to bring it up and then only you as far as I'm aware has also made an issue out of it, even Jakob doesn't seem that bothered 😉
Yes, practice is important. And an unbiased approach to DBT ABX. You know, I do not think much about those who appreciate their hearing abilities and talk about it.
Bragging is generally a bad idea. Explaining that one judged the sound of something by listening to small differences rather than relying on extensive AP measurements may simply be a statement of fact. It would seem to depend on intent and particular circumstances whether or not such a claim should be considered to be socially in poor taste.
In any case, congratulations and respect for doing the practice. 🙂
Last edited:
OK, so I did in fact hear a perceivable difference after all - slight, but there. The headphones are AudioTechnica ATH-M50x. They are very good, although not high-end.
Exactly what I was hearing in terms of signal processing is outside of my area of expertise. I would be curious to find out what is in the ‘loop’ of Dan’s signal path.
Edit: just listened to the Uncle Dave Macon track ..... gee whizz, what a groove!
Last edited:
Something amateurishly erroneous and mistaken, in the latest test. It may be the SW issue as well (no dither, 24bit reduced to 16bit, though he probably does not realize).
Dunno. I watched in interesting TED talk about a year or two ago by a US based academic who argued the case for it (i.e. intelligent technological life able to massively control/affect their environment) being very, very rare. He didn't think the Drake equation went far enough and explained why. The upshot was in this view and espoused by others is that it is probably less than one advanced life from per galaxy. Microbial life feeding off methane or similar gases - probably quite common.
OK, there's a lot of galaxies out there but they are a long, long way off.
This is true. Equally true is somebody has to get up and start dancing first, then everybody follows.
And the sound quality has to be good, the better the quality the lower the sound pressure level needed before everybody hits the dance floor.
This is only my personal theory, but I reckon most PA systems are deliberately designed to sound painfully loud, as it makes punters drink more to kill the pain and increase profits.
tapestryofsound
It would be a good idea to describe (again?) the process again, herein risk is quite high that something gets lost; original resolution, loopback in standard or altered version, software used for each step, driver info and so forth.
Maybe a new thread just for the description could help?
@ PMA,
is there any specific measured number that shows Naim's coloration? The usual set taken by review mags doesn't show any particular "coloration", only the quite lowish damping factor (wrt 4 Ohms, 13 - 27 dependent on the model) seems a bit suspicous, but that would not lead to coloration in every loudspeaker combination.
Maybe a new thread just for the description could help?
@ PMA,
is there any specific measured number that shows Naim's coloration? The usual set taken by review mags doesn't show any particular "coloration", only the quite lowish damping factor (wrt 4 Ohms, 13 - 27 dependent on the model) seems a bit suspicous, but that would not lead to coloration in every loudspeaker combination.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.