I don't.
Most likely.
Plus my system is very good, particularly the large panel ESLs (although I used NS-10's for PMA's listening test).
In addition, it isn't so much about ears. Don't always know if that word usage refers to ears literally, or the overall ear/brain system. Superhuman seems to imply an impossibility, which need not be the case. IMHO its more about brain processing outside of conscious awareness, and what exactly from that processing gets passed along into conscious awareness. No need to rehash all the details here.
Also, as @lrisbo of Purifi said about hysteresis distortion in speaker drivers, nobody not already familiar with the sound of the distortion could recognize it in blind listening tests. Yet everyone on the speaker design team can hear it. They think anyone can probably learn to hear it. Similarly, ESS trained their executive team to hear signal correlated noise from dacs, after which all but one of them learned how to recognize it. Please don't discard or discount learned skill as one possible piece of the puzzle.
[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
Didn't read the whole thread through but op pinox67 has posted somewhat recently on ASR forum about something that might make people like some low order harmonic distortoin https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ion-of-low-order-nonlinear-distortions.34863/
For example compression, uh yeah got louder, or expansion um why not if the loudspeakers compress or perhaps why not. Not sure, I think playback system should not giveth or taketh, but if it sounds good then its good. Big well oiled loudspeaker system is plenty dynamic, I'm not sure if such would benefit any.
edit. eh, on previous page it was already mentioned
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ve-non-linear-distortions.379592/post-7088097
Carry on.
For example compression, uh yeah got louder, or expansion um why not if the loudspeakers compress or perhaps why not. Not sure, I think playback system should not giveth or taketh, but if it sounds good then its good. Big well oiled loudspeaker system is plenty dynamic, I'm not sure if such would benefit any.
edit. eh, on previous page it was already mentioned
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ve-non-linear-distortions.379592/post-7088097Carry on.
Last edited:
PSU sag brought a memory, friend had great great amplifier head for electric bass, Kustom Tuck n' roll 250, its lamps dimmed on attacks and sound was just honey, thick and fat with good attack, probably all kinds of dynamic shite going on but sound was so good. Wouldn't be too good for Hifi I guess, or some types of el.bassism but for him and the music worked like charm. Carry on.
A few notes about the thresholds of audibility.
These are not the main subject of my study (you can find a lot of documentation on the web about it). What I would like to mention is that the THD value alone doesn't mean much. It is crucial to identify the shape of the distortion: which harmonics it contains, with their respective level and phase. And even when we measured these physical values with our sophisticated devices, the correlation with the effect on our perception is not at all simple, given the complexity of the perceptual mechanisms involved, not fully clarified to date. For the 2nd and 3rd order distortions that I have explored, beyond the musical content itself which is already full of harmonics that can confuse them, the masking effect and that of the auditory harmonic envelope play a decisive role. These harmonics, within certain limits, are not perceptible individually, but rather add "character" to the musical content, even pleasant for many. This is the part I'm studying, with simulations, measurements and listening tests on amplifiers built by my friends.
If you (or anyone else) want to experience the effect of these distortions on your system, you can share a repository for me to put your reference songs on. I can then process these songs, creating multiple versions with different types of distortions. To carry out blind tests, the different versions will be indistinguishable as nomenclature even with respect to the original. The listening test must be performed on a rather neutral system; certainly it is not exactly equivalent to the distortion injection by our amplifier, but it still allows you to get an idea of the effects.
I think there's a combination of learned skill and individual variance (though given that an individual is some combination of genetics and experiences [learning] it may be hard to define that line). My wife will crank her iPhone speaker and listen for extended periods (e.g. doing tasks) and I can't take 5 minutes in the room due to the distortion... Separately, I think the difference in acceptable/detestable distortion types accounts for some degree of listener preferences for different speakers.
True, at low levels.
Not quite sure what you mean. A change in "character" sounds like something distinguishable. In fact, that's what I listen for when trying to detect a difference between two files, one of which has added low-level, low-order distortion. The richer intermodulation products are the clue to listen for. The differences may be heard on simple vocal harmonies at lower midrange frequencies where the ear is sensitive. Need a clean recording though. Try Janis Ian's, "Breaking Silence," during the brief harmony sections (may have to learn to listen fast due to the brevity -- practice
).
Last edited:
Janis Ian's, Breaking Silence... you must be trolling - no?
To use such a heavily processed track for judgement of production quality is outrageous. I cant hereafter take any of your listening impression serious - sorry.
A person using this as a a reference track is in the "nice sound" corner rather than in the "correct sound" division.
//
To use such a heavily processed track for judgement of production quality is outrageous. I cant hereafter take any of your listening impression serious - sorry.
A person using this as a a reference track is in the "nice sound" corner rather than in the "correct sound" division.
//
Not at all. The recording has its uses. That it is processed does not mean it cannot be revealing of added low-level distortion in A/B comparisons (it is 'clean' in the context of the harmonies not being overly masked for that particular use). That is a completely different use than judgement of production quality.
Last edited:
Please, enlighten us about your test procedure to find the most capable dac for accurately reproducing very small distortion artifacts.I will let you know when the measurement guys figure out how to to do better time-domain measurements of transients. In the meantime its a complicated question that I don't have an a priori answer for. Probably it would involve among other things a lot of listening tests. That is assuming of course we are interested in it for the purposes of human music listening. If the purpose were to be to satisfy an AP analyzer, or to function as part of an FFT measurement system that would be an different end use purpose.
Please consider the list of points at: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ve-non-linear-distortions.379592/post-7083165
Please consider the list of points at: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ve-non-linear-distortions.379592/post-7083165
True, at low levels.
Not quite sure what you mean. A change in "character" sounds like something distinguishable. In fact, that's what I listen for when trying to detect a difference between two files, one of which has added low-level, low-order distortion. The richer intermodulation products are the clue to listen for. The differences may be heard on simple vocal harmonies at lower midrange frequencies where the ear is sensitive. Need a clean recording though. Try Janis Ian's, "Breaking Silence," during the brief harmony sections (may have to learn to listen fast due to the brevity -- practice
Maybe I was too hasty in the description.
By "indistinguishable" I mean that, beyond the file name (a prefix followed by a number) the other characteristics of the file such as its length, sample rate, metadata etc. they are identical. Thus, one cannot speculate before listening to the track whether it is the original or distorted one, thus avoiding any bias. This proof, as I have already said, is only indicative: beyond the loss of quality created by processing an "already finalized for listening" file, another important reason is described in this post. The real tests are performed by comparing preamps with different linearity characteristics, all else being equal.
Thanks for the advice about the track for the test.
Last edited:
This was about finding the most capable dac of accurately reproducing very small distortion artifacts. Either we do not have a common view of "very small distortion artifacts" or your test procedure is ridiculous.
Okay. Does that mean there are no constraints on dac quality at all?
I ask not to pester you, but because IME many things affect the ease or difficulty of detecting audible differences in preamps and or under what conditions one sounds better than another. For example, already mentioned ground loops. A little HD may help mask some of that resulting ugly, smeared, but not necessarily so easy to measure hash.
Last edited:
This thread is about human perception of nonlinear distortions, including those not so easy to see using typical measurements. The research question is in part dependent on figuring out how to select test equipment that we don't fully know how to characterize by measurements in the context of the intended end use. To know that, we would need to already know everything about how people actually perceive music. Then we could specify test equipment to meet those requirements. In other words there is some R&D work to do in one area in order to advance R&D in another area. We don't have all the answers yet, nor did the Wright Brothers. That doesn't mean ridicule is warranted.
Last edited:
I was only commenting on your quest of finding the dac most capable of accurately reproducing very small distortion artifacts. It is blatantly obvious that the dac with lower distortion is better qualified for this purpose. If your dac does not perform well in typical measurements it surely cannot accurately reproduce very small distortion artifacts. And your comments about listening to very small distortions is almost as ridiculous as your arrogant statement about finding the root cause of ESS hump just by listening.
Begging your pardon, but I didn't not use the term 'root cause.' Nobody knows that yet. Maybe only ESS will ever know some of it. However, multiple people figured out enough to infer a lot about what must being going on, probably enough to know it could not be entirely fixed by dac board designers. That's enough. We can't fix ESS's dac chip or TI's opamps, so we don't need to know all the answers at that level.
Regarding low time-averaged steady-state measurements as the one and only metric, I refer to a quote by the OP:
"To more easily correlate measurements to the effects on perception a promising path is that of time analysis applied to transients, where our auditory system is much more sensitive than frequency content. This involves comparing the derivatives of the signals, always in relation to the approach of the previous point."
Nobody is measuring that very well now. Including you.
Regarding low time-averaged steady-state measurements as the one and only metric, I refer to a quote by the OP:
"To more easily correlate measurements to the effects on perception a promising path is that of time analysis applied to transients, where our auditory system is much more sensitive than frequency content. This involves comparing the derivatives of the signals, always in relation to the approach of the previous point."
Nobody is measuring that very well now. Including you.
Last edited: