if that premise where true there would be less complaints from audiophiles about bad recordings,no?
Hi Pavel.
I have over the past few days taken close listening comparisons between Foobar and in this case VLC media player as follow up/confirmation of previous findings.
I find that there is a noise/distortion 'cast' over the sound when using Foobar that is pleasantly absent in VLC.
I suggest that you (and others) take a comparative listen to other media players.
This noise 'cast' in Foobar is even worse/greater when running the ABX applet, rendering Foobar ABX test results essentially useless except for discerning gross differences and renders your testing here invalid, sorry about that.
Foobar is broken and there is something pathologically wrong with it.
Just sayin'.
Dan.
I have over the past few days taken close listening comparisons between Foobar and in this case VLC media player as follow up/confirmation of previous findings.
I find that there is a noise/distortion 'cast' over the sound when using Foobar that is pleasantly absent in VLC.
I suggest that you (and others) take a comparative listen to other media players.
This noise 'cast' in Foobar is even worse/greater when running the ABX applet, rendering Foobar ABX test results essentially useless except for discerning gross differences and renders your testing here invalid, sorry about that.
Foobar is broken and there is something pathologically wrong with it.
Just sayin'.
Dan.
Last edited:
Thanks for your thanks.
My system is brutally clinically and musically revealing of minor changes.......not reactionary exaggerated changes, just clear matter of fact presentation of different source sounds.
Digital system time scatter when reproduced presents as overcast dirt/noise with particular spectral and dynamic characteristics.
I find that both Foobar Player and especially the Foobar ABX applet render an unacceptably loud noise/distortion profile/signature over the source sound when compared to at least one other software player (VLC)......somehow.
Tracks that sound way cool in VLC for example sound noisy and 'distorted' in Foobar.....exactly same PC, just different player software/freeware, same comparison result with other PCs.
I am imploring you to be a little cautious wrt claiming Foobar ABX findings and spend some time critically comparing software media players.
YMMV of course according to your system, perhaps others can do a same comparison on their PC and audio systems and report back.
Dan.
Last edited:
Interesting 
I thought Nail was the original but felt I preferred Screw by listening. Lol. Not quite sure what that tells me
Such is the nature of statistics that I did a fresh ABX without listening. Look at the timestamps It just happened.
These were certainly to close to call by listening for me using a laptop soundcard, and I certainly had enough attempts over a few days.
So another great test Pavel, thank you for organising and putting the work in to prepare the files.
I thought Nail was the original but felt I preferred Screw by listening. Lol. Not quite sure what that tells me
Such is the nature of statistics that I did a fresh ABX without listening. Look at the timestamps
It just happened.These were certainly to close to call by listening for me using a laptop soundcard, and I certainly had enough attempts over a few days.
So another great test Pavel, thank you for organising and putting the work in to prepare the files.
Attachments
I think that the result of this test is saying something.
The result of preferences is 7 : 1 for the screw, for the original rip. The test music sample was classical music recording, big orchestra.
Remember the previous test, apricot/avocado, again original vs. tube loop, preferences were 7 : 7. It was light, easy blues, Eric Clapton. And it was usual in previous tests with the easy music, that the distorted sound did not matter or was preferred.
This supports my long term conclusions - a complex orchestral music is to be reproduced in a most accurate way and this is preferred.
A simple, light weight music (or call it whatever you want) is tolerant to modifications and distortions and distorted or more noisy versions are often preferred.
This mentioned here above is, IMO, a key to different preferences of different listeners - the preferences depend on music they listen to.
The result of preferences is 7 : 1 for the screw, for the original rip. The test music sample was classical music recording, big orchestra.
Remember the previous test, apricot/avocado, again original vs. tube loop, preferences were 7 : 7. It was light, easy blues, Eric Clapton. And it was usual in previous tests with the easy music, that the distorted sound did not matter or was preferred.
This supports my long term conclusions - a complex orchestral music is to be reproduced in a most accurate way and this is preferred.
A simple, light weight music (or call it whatever you want) is tolerant to modifications and distortions and distorted or more noisy versions are often preferred.
This mentioned here above is, IMO, a key to different preferences of different listeners - the preferences depend on music they listen to.
Thanks Pavel. Like i thought, you already know the conclusion of the test. This is new and interesting.
The nail is very fatiguing, wrong timbre, but it has the character of the usual original sound, which is thin and sharp (so confusing that i couldn't guess). I didn't know if extra H2 with complex music will sound like that.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.