Changing EQ and adding odd-order harmonic distortion is of limited applicability. Solo violin won't show much added IMD, and violin naturally has odd-order harmonics to begin with (similar to saxophone). Thus, you can kind of get away with it for violin. However, the background noise is also getting brighter (added HD), thinner (in FR and also phasey, it sounds like), and less dynamically detailed (more compressed), along with the fiddle.
(Listening on the laptop here)
Last edited:
That was suggested before and was rejected. There are other forums where all demands for any objective testing (including serious protocol as in Jakob's links) is banned. I suspect it would get boring. This thread has special treatment of course.
The opposite is actually more like it. The more they look the density of other interesting planets shrinks. Of course the benevolent adherence to a "prime directive" by these aliens must have been remarkable to have left virtually no tangible evidence.
As for Area 51, imagine a time when aluminized mylar antenna balloons were top secret. The claimed alien glyphs turned out to be an early version of 3M Christmas wrapping tape that was used in a pinch and decayed over time. 3M provided images from their archive.
There is no talking to conspiracy theorists, it's a total waste of time.
You can blame Scott lol, for this and the Test Dept files.
No typos lol, you have copies of a 1926 recording, a piece of history that has been gooped and looped, ie the custom loopback recording interconnect cable is gooped and this affects the operation of the soundcard and consequently the recorded sound. I hope you have some interesting fun with the different sounds.
Dan.
No EQ's, no dynamics, no gain trims, no effects processing whatsoever, just unity gain loopback recordings. On headphones I find the background noise subjectively reduces, instruments clean up and false dynamics reduce. It's too late for me to try on speakers, i will do so tomorrow.
Dan.
You weren't directly and that's how you spread FUD. You would have directly talked about the audible effects of the skin effect (it would have been beneficial to your audio business) if there is one.
It was a plain question regarding the skin effect. You could have given a direct answer but you didn't so I pointed that out.
I just though Uncle Bunt was more up Bob's alley. You still ID'ed all the files so it is clear that you have no interest in the results if they were totally mixed up. Also you have stated several times your mates "easily" here the difference on a cell phone and earbuds/cheap headphones. How you can criticize any equipment is beyond me.
Last edited:
Understood. Your 15-year old Tascam sound device appears to function as an effects processor. In addition to its basic record/playback functionality, that is.
OK Dan, when I have listened to your work on Uncle Bunt, I will explain my listening methodology and ask a couple of questions about yours. Anything more said now will influence my expectation bias 🙂
tapestryofsound
Haha, who knows ?, I haven't heard you mention music preferences Bob.....Blind Melon Chitlin ?.
Yes I am interested but I still don't know if you can detect and describe the differences between the two CD Test Dept files, until then I can't know if your negatives are valid negatives or false negatives.
Once you have learned the sounds of Original files and Gooped files we can proceed and I can randomise the names of these files and the other files no problem.
Dan.
Edit: I will put up randomised file folders tomorrow and you can give that a try.
All good, but you are dealing with distinctly lo-fi source material. The Test Dept files I linked are modern high quality recordings and will test your system, wait till the neighbours are out is more fun.
Dan.
Your personal bias of some kind, you mean? The formal definition of expectation bias is one that applies to professional researchers who publish in journals and so forth, not to people who are not in that situation.
More information and a link to supporting evidence can be found in the list of cognitive biases at Wikipedia. List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia
I can't believe you are feeding this. Oh well, I did with the first bunch. I guess this would get me banned from Dan's forum if it existed.
I take that to mean that JB knows enough physics to know that a good explanation of 1/f noise is still being sought, so any claims he makes will be difficult to rebut even though any good physicist knows that you can't do it with a magic device.john curl said:
Is not the latter a definition of the former?
Wow! You can repeat this stuff with a straight face and without getting paid?
Not sure what good it would do. People who believe in goop still will, and those who don't still won't.
What seems to be missing in this instance is a set of files produced exactly the same way but without the goop treatment. I suspect we are just hearing linear and non-linear distortion effects from an old obsolete, low-cost sound card.
One more demonstration that those kinds of specifications do not fully or adequately characterize the dynamic performance of data converters.
Sure, that's why the ??.If I change the loopback cable the sound changes so which is the 'effects processor' ?.
I found that wearing my glasses upside down while on my back under a recording console was very useful for that type of activity.
Wearing variluxes for may years.
Cheers
Alan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.