What I do is use the remastered CD version of Steely Dan's 'Aja' album. Not necessarily my favorite music, but it is well recorded. Most commonly used is the song, Black Cow. There are a few places where the male vocalist sings together with the two backup singers. I know very well what that sounds like on the lowest distortion systems, mostly from listening to it a lot for IMD and jitter detection purposes.
IMD can be heard by sound made as voices blend together. Much like occurs in musical instruments, some nonlinearity is what gives chordal sounds their apparent textural sound aside from the separate voices that make it up. With some practice and careful listening IMD can be easily heard.
I know of a few people who use the above method. It does work with practice, and coaching can be helpful for some as they learn what to listen for. Interestingly, I never realized how distinctly the voices were recorded. The chordal sound of voices intermodulating was something I always thought was was on the record. Turns out it isn't, once a low-enough distortion playback system is used. Hard to believe just how separate and distinct in the midrange frequencies each voice can be in the best case so far.
Also, the same listening method works essentially the same way when instruments play all at once. There are spots on the record for that too.
On the possible subject of listening for jitter, probably best left for another time.
Last edited:
That's probably all we would discuss how to do in the ES9038Q2M thread if it where that easy. The stuff that comes from China at low cost needs a lot of work to reduce several sources of distortion. It can be done, and we do it, but its definitely work.
Last edited:
Mark...... that’s basically how I do it, just had no idea what the actual mechanics were.
It was amazing to me how many things are hidden in recordings......theres a xylophone hidden in ‘send me on my way’ by rusted root I use as a gauge.
Many tracks i never realized had back up vocals are now distinct
the banjo can also be a very revealing instrument.
And speaking of Aja.......I never realized Donald Fagen had a speech impediment before I got the system dialed in, in fact I had to look it up because I thought it was something I did!
It was amazing to me how many things are hidden in recordings......theres a xylophone hidden in ‘send me on my way’ by rusted root I use as a gauge.
Many tracks i never realized had back up vocals are now distinct
the banjo can also be a very revealing instrument.
And speaking of Aja.......I never realized Donald Fagen had a speech impediment before I got the system dialed in, in fact I had to look it up because I thought it was something I did!
Yes.
I don't make any extraordinary claims, as I have very ordinary old man hearing. I just pay attention to the little details of what I can still hear.
Aside from that, measurement can be a whole lot more work than hearing, and it helps a whole lot to have lab full of good equipment. I know what can be done with a sound card, but more work than I have time for. This forum is not the most important thing in my life, maybe it is in yours. I share what I believe to be factual, you are free believe it or not.
Look, I don't expect people who don't hear what I hear to believe in anything more than what they can hear themselves. That's human nature. So far, only PMA has tried to better himself by practicing with ABX. Good for him, and respect for the work. Why don't you other guys do some more work too instead of just assigning it to other people like they work for you.
Don't know about Mark's mods but I have heard a Topping D10 & despite it's exemplary measurements it's sound is just meh (same as most digital audio) - it misses some of the finer detail in recordings - for instance the singer's voice in the track "Bombs through the town" from the album "Boots met my Face" has a sweetness on the track intro that good DACs portray & this DAc misses. I'm talking about the slight vibrato in her held notes. Later in that track near its end there is a crescendo to the music composed of many instruments playing somewhat randomly - Better DAcs allow the inner detail of what each instrument is playing to be perceived, the Topping tends towards & uninteresting mush of noise - no ability to track inner detail/instruments
I haven't tried it but I see this modification is said to greatly improve the sound - it's basically a mod to supply a cleaner power to the XMOS USB receiver's PLL_AVDD pin.
This would seem to be a good platform for analysis too, if anyone was interested in measurements Vs audibility as it has been measured extensively on ASR
I haven't tried it but I see this modification is said to greatly improve the sound - it's basically a mod to supply a cleaner power to the XMOS USB receiver's PLL_AVDD pin.
This would seem to be a good platform for analysis too, if anyone was interested in measurements Vs audibility as it has been measured extensively on ASR
Last edited:
Another one of my ideas 😀, he started saying that after I joked about Jenga blocks. As for the rest of your comments I see no point in having a discussion, why you defend Geoff Kait, Peter Belt, etc. constantly is only known to you.
I preferred that sentence pre-edit 🙂
As an aside I am on record as saying I don't generally use things that were recorded to 24 track tapes as my reference recordings, but I do find them handy on occasion to check my ears if I think something seems wrong with the imaging on my system which can be anything from kids moving the speakers to a blocked ear. I generally use Eurythmics tracks for that because they way Annie Lenox was multitracked you can hear each track as a piece in a patchwork quilt. I am sure some would view this as sloppy mixing but it serves a purpose.
Pop quiz for Bob. Without checking the liner credits can you tell how many backing vocalists there were on 'black cow' just by listening...
But this is typical of so-called "objectivistist" that we see on audio forums - they are, almost by definition, not curious enough to investigate outlying phenomena. I'm not saying the Bybees have or have not an audible effect or have/have not a coating on the foil which is where the thousands of virtually nearly invisible devices" exist but I've seen SY's 'analysis' & he is very much the "performance artist" that he accuses others of being - much like Randi
Based on the number of posts you make, it was obvious!
I'm pretty sure you guys are measuring the wrong things but I have my ears to tell me when something is better - I don;t need the comfort blanket that is so desperately needed by others. So I say, let them investigate if they want - life's too short for this "proof needed for others" games - have at it if you want
Is there a possibility that the Topping D10 would sound just fine with no flaws to me?
You are in no position to tell me what to do. You have the right to try to convince me of your listening abilities as much as I have the right to tell you are either delusional or a crook.
Did it occur to you that perhaps others have better things to do (more interesting, more productive, more entertaining, etc...) than following any bull chip available on the Internet?
Yes, absolutely there is every possibility - biases work both ways - and despite what many say, Foobar ABX won't remove all the biases that effect what is audibly perceived - for instance that all exemplary measuring DACs will sound the same, will it?
But one major PS to add - you will not inherently hear any flaws with the Topping D10 - it's only by comparison to something better that you will notice it's flaws. This is actually the great problem & where the lack of curiosity shows - you don't believe there could be anything better than the Topping based on measurements, so two things result from this - you are not really bothered to hear if a simple mod to the XMOS PLL_AVDD produces a better sound (by & large you are not really interested in hearing if any other DAC sounds better) & another aspect is that your nocebo bias is confirmed because of this lack of wider listening & you will almost 100% be guaranteed not to hear any difference even when one exists
That's why controls are needed in the likes of Foobar ABX - to weed out this very strong bias
Last edited:
That's the funniest thing I've seen in weeks. I find the same true of "total subjectivists" (whatever that is) in many cases zero intellectual curiosity to explore reasons behind anything they "hear". Blind acceptance of any story made up by a manufacturer about the unknown physics behind their babies.
Sorry to inform you I am not about to waste my time trying to disprove claims about super-luminal cables, room temperature super-conductors mixed up by accident in a garage, etc.
And I hope you will forgive me if I don't bother auditioning a Totaldac d1-six DAC
Last edited:
Yes, I was going to add that to my post but my edit time lapsed
It's a Mexican standoff - one side don't see any need to doubt their measurements (you have all the 'selective proof' you need) & the other side don't need the 'proof' you guys are always crying out for.
C'est la vie - same as it ever was.
So long as we don't violate the rules, we are allowed to say what we want. That much is true.
And, if its okay for you to calumniate up stories that I am delusional or a crook, then its okay for me to do the same to you too, I suppose. How about if every time you do that to someone here, we all do it back to you to see how you like it. And if you don't get hassled to make it clear you are expressing an opinion not a fact, then I don't have to either, nor does anyone else. Questionable whether that's how things should be in a forum is all. Things will tend to go downhill faster than with the goop posts, although they are a problem too. Even JC says the teasing should stop.
Mexican standoff, as I said 😀
So you would assume my sighted bias is resulting in me hearing a difference & I would assume that in your listening (sighted or blind), your confirmation bias results in you hearing no difference - a nocebo result
That's why Jakob & I suggest that if controls were used in ABX tests & test were run with a level of professionalism, it may reveal nocebo biases at play?
But you guys resist this type of internal check/control in ABX tests & react every time it is raised - go figure
Last edited:
Yes and trying to relativize everything and make it as much uncertain as possible. Sorry, I do not take you serious since some time. I can see no contribution to the subject, of yours.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.