Thank you Dan for flagging this up, I shall read intently.
John Curl is someone I would never be rude to. My rudeness is reserved for the thankfully few among us. My apologies for being rude are fast becoming legendary. Self deprecation is a wonderful thing.
tapestryofsound
PS: Dan, keep going with the goop, it will lead to somewhere.
Dan,
There seems to be no response from you about my results of the 2 cd files or the unclebunt files.......I’m assuming my findings were not in line with yours?
Pavel,
Is there anything you can see about the 01 file besides it’s 24 bit that would make me prefer it over the others especially when compared to the other 24 bit file you called 04 ?
Yes.......and I suppose as with any art, some will be recorded well and some will be steaming turds, but it’s almost impossible to use a steaming turd as reference material, unless.......that’s all you listen to.
I believe the source recording quality is the first thing to address......most artists realize this but some don’t or it maybe even seems as though it’s purposely done sub par as part of the art?
There seems to be no response from you about my results of the 2 cd files or the unclebunt files.......I’m assuming my findings were not in line with yours?
Pavel,
Is there anything you can see about the 01 file besides it’s 24 bit that would make me prefer it over the others especially when compared to the other 24 bit file you called 04 ?
Ok well therein lies my confusion......what are the ‘correct answers’ ?
Yes.......and I suppose as with any art, some will be recorded well and some will be steaming turds, but it’s almost impossible to use a steaming turd as reference material, unless.......that’s all you listen to.
I believe the source recording quality is the first thing to address......most artists realize this but some don’t or it maybe even seems as though it’s purposely done sub par as part of the art?
In an ABX test two "things" were presented as "A" and "B" and one of these randomly assigned as "X"; the participant must decide if "X" is "A" or "B". The plugin knows in each trial what "X" is and and therefore knows when an answer is correct.
Ok, thanks........so the only thing ‘correct’ is being able to identify track A as track A , inturn showing there is a difference?
If that’s so then it really shows no preference as to better/worse?
Pretty much, we assume it is art, because it is sold as such, preference isn't part of the deal other than your choice in whether to buy it or not.
Scottj, as you’ve said several times, the music is what matters not the sq.......having tweaked about as much performance (in regard to reference recordings) as I can out of my current system the latest conversations here has me wondering what the best way to enjoy the ‘steaming turds’ of my collection.......What might be the best amp type to hide inaccuracies? Class A ?
Thank Dimitri, and thank JC for pearls that you won't find elsewhere.
Thanks for the encouragement, Goop has future.
Dan.
What Max/Dan is doing to the audio can at best make rather poor recordings sound better, much like Aural Exciter can do.
Poor recordings made today are low-budget all-digitally-processed projects and or poorly executed attempts to compete strongly in the loudness wars.
A lack of dither on the original track in this case appears to be due to choice of source material. Too late to add dither now, since truncation has already occurred. Dan needs to find another source file to work with or listeners will have to accept the original recording as it is.
Yep, an ABX test is solely a test for difference.
In an orthodox test/experimental regime comes a test for difference first and then test(s) for preference.
If one does not care so much about orthodoxy, he can test for preference and conclude from an established preference to a existent difference. 😉
Is that really ensured at this stage?
Must not be so, it could be just an original digital recording done 16 bit converters available (at that time); in ancy case applying dither now will still decorrelate the granularity and the signal, but will of course raise the noise level.
I'll shut up now then 😉 You might want to do different things depending on what is "wrong", so maybe just some form of processing, I can't advise on specifics as my MO is just to listen to it as is, or not.
If I only realized it was as easy as just agreeing 😀
Seriously though, yah it has me wondering about including a seperate source that would include my aphex aural exciter just for this reason......maybe even a seperate amp and speakers dedicated just for casual listening.
Seriously though, yah it has me wondering about including a seperate source that would include my aphex aural exciter just for this reason......maybe even a seperate amp and speakers dedicated just for casual listening.
The only idea I've occasionally toyed with is omnidirectional speakers for casual/moving around listening as I normally listen nearfield and subs are placed and EQ'd for listening position too.
Based on previous experience and based on my comments from listening to the first set of files, it is a near-certainty, IMHO. Of course, there is no way to prove that someone might not prefer the treatment on well-recorded music. Therefore, I probably should have added an IHMO disclaimer.
One could seek to disguise the file by adding noise, if that were the goal. It is too late for it to sound properly dithered assuming it in fact ever needed to be digitally dithered in the first place, given that the recording noise floor may be well above the 16th bit anyway. Could be only the fade out tail that looks problematic, don't know.
About 10yrs ago I built a pair of omni’s that had a selenium 10” coax that fired up into a dispersion cone and a down firing 10” jbl sub powered by plate amps. I’ll see if I can’t find a picture.
Right now I’m playing around with intentional comb filtering and getting some nice 3D effects. That might come into play in this regard as comb effect seems to have a smoothing effect.
Right now I’m playing around with intentional comb filtering and getting some nice 3D effects. That might come into play in this regard as comb effect seems to have a smoothing effect.
Interesting, did you make the cone yourself? You may like this thread
OmniDirectional - work in progress
OmniDirectional - work in progress
Sorry I didn't get back to you. I agree Uncle Bunt 01 is better than the original, way better but I also reckon 03 is best... it sounds more 'correct' and 'in-tune' to me and with more correct dynamics and lower perceived noise floor.
For the CD quality Two Flames files your assessments with mine in brackets....
Track 00. /. Track 01 Dynamic. /. Less dynamic, flat (T 01 - More correct, less false dynamics) Engaging. /. Not engaging (Neither is very engaging) More depth, 3D /. Less depth,2d (Not much depth in the recording, T 01 less false depth) Realistic. /. Dull,hazy,veiled (T 01 less veiled by false stuff, brighter) Raw. /. More refined, perhaps a little more focused (T 01 Agreed more refined/focused/less false junk) General assessment. Track 00 is much better (Opposite, I prefer T 01)
Track 01 (second track) is more like the first (track 1) unadulterated you tube track. Track 00 is more like the second (track 2)of the you tube but better all around. Ok, in my experience I find that Goop subjectively 'restores' lost information in compressed formats, and 'tames' false dynamics in higher quality formats, which partly aligns with what you are saying here, except that you might be giving the nod to false dynamics.
Back in my formative years I heard the likes of Holiday In Cambodia on 'normal' systems and it sounded loud, raucous, rough and in your face. When I heard it on really good gear that did not add false embellishments it sounded calm, clear and civilised with 'flattened' dynamics which I soon learned is a hallmark of good systems, ie no quenching of real dynamics and no false dynamics either, when you hear that right balance you know it and the system can be run significantly louder before objectionable distortions kill the party. Thanks again for your effort, I will do that jazz track for you next.
Dan.
Last edited:
Clearly you don't understand, a properly dithered 16 bit recording never has silence as an endless string of zeros as PMA's plot showed. If your 16 bit files were recorded without dither they can never be fixed all the very low level information is lost or distorted. Mark will tell you that this is audible to careful listeners.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.