John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

[Max Headroom]

Let me check that I have this right: Max's files which are almost the same but different can only be reliably distinguished using a system which is flawed in some way such as a mobile phone or Bluetooth speaker i.e. the Max effect is something unnatural which confuses lossy compression algorithms? Listen to them on a good system and all differences fade away?

You have it completely wrong.


Dan.

 

[scott wurcer]

The best trick all week, almost as good as room temperature superconductivity.

AudioQuest has always stated that all cables cause damage because the output is never as good as the input. However, by eliminating a speaker cable’s characteristic impedance, AQ’s ZERO Technology is an unprecedented step towards reducing that damage.

 

[benb]

Okay, I had to google it.

The result is greater dynamic contrast,

I've never heard of dynamic contrast before [okay, I don't read that many audio ads], this is obviously something newly discovered that can only pass through these cables.

https://www.audioquest.com/cables/speaker-cables/folk-hero-series/robin-hood-bass

 

[Max Headroom]

Pointing out a poster's hypocrisy isn't trolling.

It is trolling if there is no hypocrisy.....please show where hypocrisy on my part is indicated or else please apologise for your trolling.

The mobile phone and BT speaker examples are in addition to same results on my main system and serve to reinforce my findings on my systems as do Pavel's findings.


Dan.

Dan, it might be better to 'tone it down' a bit. I know that I have just stuck my head out, and am under fire, but I can cover myself well enough. You are exposing yourself too much to unfriendly criticsl.

Thanks John, I am not worried by the toxic 'small village' mentality pitchforkers who know of the world over the next hillock only by legend and superstition.


Dan.

 

[PMA]

Pavel, thankyou for your effort, you have taken a listen and you detect difference, as should be expected.
..
So you have shown that your hearing and your system are good enough to differentiate a loopback recording using a 2003 era usb interface, perhaps you can describe in subjective terms the differences you note ?.

If you are keen we can progress to 02>03 and 02>04 differences.

Dan.

Dan, I have easily found the audible difference between 01 and 02 basically for the reason that the 02 file is technically flawed. So it would be possible to get not only the 8/8 presented ABX result, but also 100/100 or whatever, when one was patient enough. Will you find that technical flaw, please (before I disclose it)? My hint is to check the connectors used for the loopback recording.
Regardless that flaw that enables 100% success in a listening detection, the biggest audible difference between 01 and 02 files is the rustling "sss" "shshsh", in sibilants.

Yes I may probably try the further files as well.

As you know, I do not care much about verbal evidence of possibly detected audible difference, but I request ABX proof and I am also giving such proof, if I am able to get it.

If you are keen we can progress to 02>03 and 02>04 differences.

Dan, here is the 02 x 06 result.

foo_abx 2.0.2 report
foobar2000 v1.3.7
2019-05-21 08:21:23

File A: 02 - Lana Del Rey - hope - TS 16bit.wav
SHA1: 830c46a94e6e422a6f4008f4f6488ec7a92f25f1
File B: 06 - Lana Del Rey - hope - TSM+JM 16bit.wav
SHA1: 40d337f8114f1b0898d3f27ffb10bb280c6d2363

Used DSPs:
Resampler (PPHS)

Output:
WASAPI (event) : Speakers (iConnectAudio4+ D1), 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

08:21:23 : Test started.
08:22:12 : 01/01
08:22:23 : 02/02
08:22:34 : 03/03
08:22:45 : 04/04
08:22:50 : 05/05
08:22:54 : 06/06
08:23:05 : 07/07
08:23:10 : 08/08
08:23:10 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 8/8
Probability that you were guessing: 0.4%

 -- signature -- 
6db9de55e0e3f2a6d6813709f7c841004c1f5dde

Could not find any 03 or 04 labeled files. Dropbox screenshot attached.

 

[Bonsai]

The best trick all week, almost as good as room temperature superconductivity.

There isn't any greater example of snake oil than the cable industry.

I supplied some bog standard $15 13A IEC cables with my stuff. First thing the dealer did was put them in the bin. I asked him why? Because ‘they sound crap’

Better that he was honest with me and said ‘because I can sell a $300 mains cable and make 50 margin points on it’.

The funniest thing is the IEC socket end that plugs into the back of the preamp. The chassis is 90 mm high and the IEC plug about 80 mm in diameter.

You ask me if I know what the ‘brown note’ is. Yes I do. It’s the voodoo science sprouting cable crowd.

 

[chris719]

The best trick all week, almost as good as room temperature superconductivity.

It’s a pity that the FTC is unwilling and probably unable to shut these clowns down.

 

[dreamth]

It’s a pity that the FTC is unwilling and probably unable to shut these clowns down.

The FTC have bosses and bosses are humans with big piles of money..money must be spent on something, don't they?

Now imagine Pablo Escobar being told by a "high end rubber " dealer that instead of spending 1 million dollars on rubber bands each year he might better use high end rubber bands for his precious money 🙂

 

[scottjoplin]

It means some people's brains don't process sound the same way yours do

I've been reading about how ears work recently, fascinating how many gaps and theories there are, that's before you even consider the brain.

 

[chris719]

The FTC have bosses and bosses are humans with big piles of money..money must be spent on something, don't they?

Now imagine Pablo Escobar being told by a "high end rubber " dealer that instead of spending 1 million dollars on rubber bands each year he might better use high end rubber bands for his precious money 🙂

The FTC only seems to work on some offenders. Too small and you’re not on the radar. Too big and it’s going to be a nasty fight - unless you’re telecom in the US and you’ve achieved regulatory capture, in which case nothing will be done.

 

[scott wurcer]

as do Pavel's findings.

So you fully endorse Foobar ABX now, what it "does' to the sound has been fixed?

 

[PMA]

Foobar ABX is excellent to find flaws like short-term dropouts or short-term distortion, if it happens in only one of the two tested files. This is the case here.

 

[DF96]

I'm glad we have established what constitutes a proper playback system.

A proper playback system is one which allows a Max effect to be heard reasonably reliably. A similar definition applies to the listener's hearing abilities.

I say 'a Max effect' rather than 'the Max effect' because over the past few years there have been more than one Max effect? Few, though, actually reached the point of test files appearing.

by eliminating a speaker cable’s characteristic impedance

Now that is a clever trick: a cable with no inductance or capacitance. Much cleverer than room temperature superconductivity. Nearly as clever as the Maxwell demon in a Bybee.

 

[vacuphile]

The Mythbusters took that one on, it was a myth. It was hilarious and they really cranked it up and wore adult diapers.

It was about my time to propagate a myth 🙂

 

[Max Headroom]

Pavel, thankyou again for sensible answers. Is there a reason to revert to the 16bit versions when 24bit versions are available ?. Yes, there have been connector issues, and glitches, does that spoil the party if you skip over those bits....or are you saying whole of 02 file is suspect ?, I haven't checked properly.

Ok, the Lana Del Ray folder...
01 - Orig is original source file (maybe attenuated) converted to 24bit word so as to minimise attenuation artifacts ?.
03 is recording of custom loopback cable incorporating clean goop.
06 is recording of same clean cable with added 'Modifier' goop at ends.

Sorry, about the file names confusions, there are in fact 04 and 05 files with other permutations of Modifiers, I can upload them. So Pavel, if you were to discount sections of these recordings where there are giveaway technical defects (ie not 'cheating') do you think you can still return the same results ?.......

I have repeatedly been able to do so informally to my satisfaction. If your answer is no please suggest a recording that you like and I can process it correctly. If your answer is yes then we have a new line of discussion and experimentation to be explored. Thanks for your efforts so far. Dan.

I say 'a Max effect' rather than 'the Max effect' because over the past few years there have been more than one Max effect? Few, though, actually reached the point of test files appearing.

There has only ever been one clean Max effect, implementations have evolved and Modifiers defined. There are now test files available, suggest a track you know and I will process it for you to try on your system. Dan.

 

[scott wurcer]

Now that is a clever trick: a cable with no inductance or capacitance. Much cleverer than room temperature superconductivity. Nearly as clever as the Maxwell demon in a Bybee.

The claim is so easily falsifiable (any ham could do it in 10 min) that I'm wondering what they actually mean.

 

[tapestryofsound]

Dan aka Max Headroom,

Just keep going, they used to laugh at Tesla and his sound recordings from outer space. It would be great if Pavel proved you right, even better (heaven forbid!) if DF96 agreed with him. From the sidelines this is an amazing discussion. My perspective is:- irrespective of whether you are right or wrong, at least you continue to try.

The world is yours, so ignore the pimpletons and carry on. ToS

 

[PMA]

Pavel, thankyou again for sensible answers.
Is there a reason to revert to the 16bit versions when 24bit versions are available ?.

Dan, it makes no difference whether 16 bit or 24 bit versions are used. In the 02 files (both 16 and 24 bit), there is a signal dropout near 48.9s. Please see it attached. It is very audible, just play the file patiently.

In the 06 files, near 15s, there is an audible distortion which is not in the original.

My suspicion is that you use some kind of file modifications which start at 48.9s for file 02 and at 15s for file 06. After those time moments, the files seem to be modified, probably a kind of phase manipulation or crosstalk. The turn-on of the modifications is not well treated and remains audible. At 100% success.

 

[Max Headroom]

Dan aka Max Headroom, Just keep going, they used to laugh at Tesla and his sound recordings from outer space. It would be great if Pavel proved you right, even better (heaven forbid!) if DF96 agreed with him. From the sidelines this is an amazing discussion. My perspective is:- irrespective of whether you are right or wrong, at least you continue to try. The world is yours, so ignore the pimpletons and carry on. ToS

Wow TOS, thanks for your such encouraging words and thoughts, I have thought through the same and the truths drive me forward whilst ignoring the detractors who 'don't get it' quite yet.....their resistance and scorn is borne of ignorance and worship of false idols.

On the surface this investigation is showing that particular changes in one particular audio cable can cause changes in sound, the bigger picture is far more extensive dare I say universally significant and universally beneficial.......Mr Tesla would surely understand, approve and encourage.

Dan.

Dan, it makes no difference whether 16 bit or 24 bit versions are used. In the 02 files (both 16 and 24 bit), there is a signal dropout near 48.9s. Please see it attached. It is very audible, just play the file patiently. In the 06 files, near 15s, there is an audible distortion which is not in the original. My suspicion is that you use some kind of file modifications which start at 48.9s for file 02 and at 15s for file 06. After those time moments, the files seem to be modified, probably a kind of phase manipulation or crosstalk. The turn-on of the modifications is not well treated and remains audible. At 100% success.

Ok, in the good sections 02 and 06 both sound different to 01, and 02 sounds different to 06. There is no application of DSP effects anywhere in the signal chain.

The cable in 02 and 06 does cause 'monoing' (narrowing) of mono signals, and it also causes changes in depth (time) stability......this is what you are picking up I expect. This kind of 'improvement' or 'ordering' goes against theory and usual experience, this sound will be a 'new' sound for you as it was for me long time ago.

This time/PIM stability is close to optimal in the 02 file, and there is a definite and characteristic time instability (signature) in 06. Other folders have other files with defined instability/signature according to Modifier. These time/PIM instabilities conspire to cause 'resonances' which present as subjective FR anomalies (emphasis and/or nulling), and also cause change in subjective dynamics which includes subjective changes of attack and release/tails. This is long winded way of saying that wrt 01, image width and location is more defined and precise and depth/layering is more defined and precise in the 02 version, and time/depth information deliberately altered/worsened in the 06 version wrt 02 but subjectively nicer/more fun than 01. This all due to changes in nature of system intrinsic noise and is to be expected, the key is in controlling/defining this system noise, there is physiologically correct/benign system noise (02) and there is system noise according to taste (03). Like I have said this system noise variability is nothing new actually, what is new is understanding of what is 'good' noise and what is 'bad' noise, and how to control and define such system noises.

Dan.

 

[PMA]

Sorry Dan, I do not agree with your explanation at all. My explanation is that you have a bad connection somewhere (a connector contact?) that causes an audible dropout in file 02, 25ms long, and short distortion in file 06. All that cable alchemy is an imagination, to me, not supported by any proof. This is a repeating story.