It must be remembered that 'college EE' can include people who write computer software, or look at 'human factors' or project management, or do DSP theory or orthogonal coding theory or many others things which do not involve boring people like Ohm and Kirchoff and Maxwell.
"Collage EE" may be in the arts faculty?
"Collage EE" may be in the arts faculty?
His teaching and research interests are in the areas of Communications Signals and Systems, Broadband Telecommunications Network Design and Optimization, and Stochastic Modeling. His consulting interests are in enterprise network and public switched network modeling, design and optimization.
He has a real patent and a real IEEE paper.
He has a real patent and a real IEEE paper.
And the other problem with foobar is that its inherent quality - ability to playback sound with minimal degradation - is poor. This will of course vary between playback environments, but when the "main" testing tool is not robust then all bets are off.
This is course comparable to using a hardware ABX box with poor quality connectors and switches ...
BTW, your experiences with the arrangement of powering up the gear, and power leads, exactly mirrors my own ...
I had a idea floating around in my mind as to how to do a listening comparison procedure, which I feel gets around some of the problems of classic AB testing.
A short snippet of music, or whatever, which is repeated 10 times, for each run. If A is the first version played then that same one is repeated at least 5 times, so that the 'character' of the sound is short term 'learnt'. Then, at some instance from 6 to 10, chosen randomly, the playback switches to B, and continues to now repeat B through to the 10th play. Obviously, the test is to choose, 6 to 10, when the changeover occurred, etc ...
Comments?
A short snippet of music, or whatever, which is repeated 10 times, for each run. If A is the first version played then that same one is repeated at least 5 times, so that the 'character' of the sound is short term 'learnt'. Then, at some instance from 6 to 10, chosen randomly, the playback switches to B, and continues to now repeat B through to the 10th play. Obviously, the test is to choose, 6 to 10, when the changeover occurred, etc ...
Comments?
This was discussed at length on some threads where comparisons between posted samples of music were done, some months back. For my machine, foobar playback is somewhat inferior anyway, and the ABX module just compounded that.
Inferior, in that if two versions of a clip are played, one superior to the other, then the ABX module drags the quality of the better one down, much closer to the lesser. This is not while doing the test, this is when knowingly playing A, and B; something like listening to a 2nd generation tape copy, vs. the master.
Inferior, in that if two versions of a clip are played, one superior to the other, then the ABX module drags the quality of the better one down, much closer to the lesser. This is not while doing the test, this is when knowingly playing A, and B; something like listening to a 2nd generation tape copy, vs. the master.
Again, how so "somewhat inferior"? By what mechanism?
And what do you mean by "superior"? Wider frequency range?
The mechanism most likely is that the process of playback requires the computer to be more "busy" during playback, meaning greater digital switching taking place, and more interference being generated, which impacts on the internal DAC, and accompanying audio circuitry. marce has already questioned my use of the D/A inside this nasty RF environment - you see, you can't have it both ways ... 
. There are great volumes of discussion elsewhere on how to tone down this noisy, background hash - including using players which do things as simply as possible.
"Superior", as in the sound is clearer, the inner detail is more easily heard, the instruments are more easily distinguished - all the usual stuff - or perhaps you are one of those who can't separate FM from AM radio, .
. There are great volumes of discussion elsewhere on how to tone down this noisy, background hash - including using players which do things as simply as possible."Superior", as in the sound is clearer, the inner detail is more easily heard, the instruments are more easily distinguished - all the usual stuff - or perhaps you are one of those who can't separate FM from AM radio,
.
So, an educated guess...
"Superior", as in the sound is clearer, the inner detail is more easily heard, the instruments are more easily distinguished - all the usual stuff - or perhaps you are one of those who can't separate FM from AM radio,
...and handwaving, with an implied dig. Nice.
Last post - its clear that you have great difficulty separating the evidence levels required when you state your impressions as reality. I haven't counted them and don't intend to, but none of your many post have given any hard data. By that I don't even mean electrical or other direct measurements. Just a set objective findings on which you could base rational decision-making.
I'm glad you are enjoying your process and I do wish you well in it - you seem to have a mission and a method that you firmly believe in.
However, as a fact loving type, I'm not inclined to follow that path.
Thanks for the discussion! BTW, How's those Blues eh?
When all else fails, hide behind the objectivists' stance - I am assured it's a very comfortable foxhole, but it's not a place to be, for me - for a start, I would then have a lot of recordings which would too unpleasant to listen to ... not very nice at all!! ... ,
"Objective findings" which are meaningful to the subjective experience are far too messy - the world of the objectivists who buy and appreciate speakers by the numbers doesn't compute for me, if they're happy, and content, with impressive graphs I wish them well ...
The "method" has worked well, for me, for 30 years - when I hear the mediocre or even terrible sound that inflicts much of the audio world I'm pleased not to be part of it.
Blues, eh ... one of my many interests - just listening for the first time, at the moment, to the soundtrack CD, from the library, of the Tron Legacy movie - to warm up the PC setup. Big, big, big sound - music by Daft Punk; could fill an amphitheatre easily is the impression it gives, this is where one would like 132dB SPL capability, to overwhelm the neighbourhood - what's surprising is that it's noisy, for a 2010 recording there is quite a bit of tape like hiss ...
, "Objective findings" which are meaningful to the subjective experience are far too messy - the world of the objectivists who buy and appreciate speakers by the numbers doesn't compute for me, if they're happy, and content, with impressive graphs I wish them well ...
The "method" has worked well, for me, for 30 years - when I hear the mediocre or even terrible sound that inflicts much of the audio world I'm pleased not to be part of it.
Blues, eh ... one of my many interests - just listening for the first time, at the moment, to the soundtrack CD, from the library, of the Tron Legacy movie - to warm up the PC setup. Big, big, big sound - music by Daft Punk; could fill an amphitheatre easily is the impression it gives, this is where one would like 132dB SPL capability, to overwhelm the neighbourhood - what's surprising is that it's noisy, for a 2010 recording there is quite a bit of tape like hiss ...
As an electronic music producer, many of us are actively trying to add hiss and noise to our recordings. You would probably have a fit listening to some of the noisier music about at the moment. Still, sounds great on the home made atcs, as speakers are what's important (and enough amps and power to drive them)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.