Wrong. There is a difference in crest factor as well. I wish you would stop with the smoke screen here. I don't know what you're trying to prove.
Why? If you get the information you need, at adequate precision, you're pretty much done.
So here'w what I'm getting from the various factions in this thread. Some present a case and claim there's no solution. I think that's the way they want it. Science is bad, engineers are all evil. We can hear things that aren't measurable. Then there's the faction that claims to have some form of proof that resistors either have different types of distortion and/or they sound different. They also supply no proof. Why not? If it's true then we all should be able to do the same tests and auditions. Then there's the faction that argues there can be no such thing as proof. They are absolutitsts, and I don't think they care at all about what might be usable data, or practical application, but would rather just be right.
So here's what we need to forward. If there's a measurable difference in resistors, don't just say there is, tell the world you you measured it. If there's an audible difference in resistors, please cite the test conditions, circuit, audition material etc. You've seen the list. And that's just to get the thread moved of its rut. IF you cannot do that, your claims are hollow and without basis.
If the circular arguments persists, I suggest everyone just bail out and find something productive to do. I know I will. And this ain't it.
So here's what we need to forward. If there's a measurable difference in resistors, don't just say there is, tell the world you you measured it. If there's an audible difference in resistors, please cite the test conditions, circuit, audition material etc. You've seen the list. And that's just to get the thread moved of its rut. IF you cannot do that, your claims are hollow and without basis.
If the circular arguments persists, I suggest everyone just bail out and find something productive to do. I know I will. And this ain't it.
Well, perhaps you are not getting the information you need. Your four digit meter might read the same all the time. If you made the same tests with a 10 digit meter, you might find small but measurable differences correlating to signal level or frequency or who knows what. You seem to be wanting really hard to be able to measure something, and a low precision instrument is just not the tool for that job.
phase is the only difference between the two spectra.
The signals them selves are of course vastly different as anyone can see from the time domain graph.
Hardly anybody needs that information. It's useful to very, very few.
I get all the precision I need. Lets say you're measuring an audio level to 10 digits. And you now need to change it a bit. The smallest possible physical adjustment of a trim pot, or digital control renders the bottom 5 digits useless. IT may be accurate, but it's not useful.
That "what" part, did you try to seek info but couldn't come up with one? It should've been an easy one, audibility. It's audio equipment so what else is there? That should've been the first on the list.
A listening comparison test is an experiment subject to statistical variation. You test the null hypothesis that eg two sources sound the same. If the likelikood (P value) that the test result is solely due to random variation is very low then the null hypothesis is discarded, ie the sources do not sound the same. This is not a proof but evidence - the lower ap value the stronger evidence. In pricicple, the chance that the difference is due to randomness cannot be totally eliminated no matter how many times the experiment is repeated and how many panelists used
I'm not discussing this. I've told you several times. Post the simple AM signal I've asked for, or we're done here. And you have failed to prove anything.
If you go back to the original blog, Lars is not stating he is out to 'prove' anything. Mark seems to be the one wanting to use this as proof for completely unrelated issues. So why are you demanding some new evidence?
So far are mentioned modulation index and crest factor (in this case directly related) differences.
I don’t understand since when is constant amplitude PM signal the same except in phase, as amplitude modulated signal? How can phase modulation make constant amplitude signal to behave same as amplitude modulated signal and result with same end effect without demodulation?
It can’t, and those two raw modulated signals can never be the same and sound similar. It is not an example of two same signals that differ only in phase (with Markw4 assumption, as they sound different, that phase change is easily audible). Just the opposite, two signals are very different, not because of phase difference.
How it came to this: from blog showing to us that FFT doesn’t tell everything we need to know about signal, to “they have the same FFT so they are the same except phase”?
EDIT: now I see that in post #286 difference between two signals is more precisely limited to "difference in spectra", not complete signals.
Last edited:
As far as I understand, no proof was asked in relation to blog. It is claim, made here, that two signals differ only in phase that is not accepted.
So what are we wasting our time on this for? Whilst a mathematical delve into FFTs and what can go wrong with them is a light distraction this thread has gone the wrong way for that to happen.
+1 shame. Not sure why and know better than to ask.
There is an issue I would like to clear up here: I am not trying to 'prove' resistors can sound different, that wasn't the point. It was however an illustration of another point I tried to make but didn't seem to be really understood by most here: Everyone lives in their own mentally constructed world. Too many here still can't accept the existence of their own 'Naive Realism.' We can't help but believe our own senses and accept our mental experience of them as true reality.
Some people have experienced the confusion of cognitive dissonance produced by believing phase is inaudible, yet hearing a difference in lrisbo files. lrisbo clearly explained the mathematical process of FFT, phase rotation of the complex frequencies, and inverse FFT to produce the phase rotated files. As a side effect of phase rotation, crest factor also changed. As I mentioned a long time ago Nelson Pass made a circuit that creates third harmonic and allows it to be phase shifted. Its easy to see how crest factor changes and hear that the effect can sometimes be audible.
Some people experienced cognitive dissonance by trying to reconcile two waveforms can sound different yet look the same on a typical audio FFT. Some people went so far as to think it was a trick for marketing purposes to sell snake oil.
Another thing many people have done is fail to see that when they hear a difference in two files, they insist the difference is plainly audible and no DBT is needed. Yet when someone else does the exact same thing, then the same people insist formal published DBT is needed. The real difference in those two situations is whether you are doing the listening or someone else is. Of course one can make up all sorts of reasons why what they hear is obviously true, whereas the other guy's perception is probably not true. That takes us right back to Naive Realism, its a good example of one facet of it.
The third thing that seems very difficult to understand for many is that audiophiles have been treated very badly when they claim to hear something that someone else doesn't hear. Naive Realism again. But now it is producing ridicule, derision, and sometimes even outrage. One thing I noticed is that many here don't like being treated the exact same way as they treat others, and for the exact same reasons. As I said before, that lrisbo files sound different is an extraordinary claim, it seems to go against psychoacoustic principles. That is often a reason people use to demand extraordinary proof. However, in this case it all goes out the window when it is you that hears a difference. Then its an obvious difference, not extraordinary at all.
Not possible to explain all the above fully in one post or even in one thick book, but its work trying to absorb. The hardest thing for all humans, and I'm human too, it to see our own biases, inconsistencies, self-justification, etc. However, its so easy to see it all in others. That said, I'm sure some people will have a lot to say about how their perceive my faults (shoot the messenger rather than get the message itself).
In case anyone wants to dive into it, some resources to start with:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naïve...ïve realism,uninformed, irrational, or biased.
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/02...ays.&text=Comment:,marvel, but a fallible one.
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fas.../ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mi...books&sprefix=the+right,stripbooks,140&sr=1-1
Some people have experienced the confusion of cognitive dissonance produced by believing phase is inaudible, yet hearing a difference in lrisbo files. lrisbo clearly explained the mathematical process of FFT, phase rotation of the complex frequencies, and inverse FFT to produce the phase rotated files. As a side effect of phase rotation, crest factor also changed. As I mentioned a long time ago Nelson Pass made a circuit that creates third harmonic and allows it to be phase shifted. Its easy to see how crest factor changes and hear that the effect can sometimes be audible.
Some people experienced cognitive dissonance by trying to reconcile two waveforms can sound different yet look the same on a typical audio FFT. Some people went so far as to think it was a trick for marketing purposes to sell snake oil.
Another thing many people have done is fail to see that when they hear a difference in two files, they insist the difference is plainly audible and no DBT is needed. Yet when someone else does the exact same thing, then the same people insist formal published DBT is needed. The real difference in those two situations is whether you are doing the listening or someone else is. Of course one can make up all sorts of reasons why what they hear is obviously true, whereas the other guy's perception is probably not true. That takes us right back to Naive Realism, its a good example of one facet of it.
The third thing that seems very difficult to understand for many is that audiophiles have been treated very badly when they claim to hear something that someone else doesn't hear. Naive Realism again. But now it is producing ridicule, derision, and sometimes even outrage. One thing I noticed is that many here don't like being treated the exact same way as they treat others, and for the exact same reasons. As I said before, that lrisbo files sound different is an extraordinary claim, it seems to go against psychoacoustic principles. That is often a reason people use to demand extraordinary proof. However, in this case it all goes out the window when it is you that hears a difference. Then its an obvious difference, not extraordinary at all.
Not possible to explain all the above fully in one post or even in one thick book, but its work trying to absorb. The hardest thing for all humans, and I'm human too, it to see our own biases, inconsistencies, self-justification, etc. However, its so easy to see it all in others. That said, I'm sure some people will have a lot to say about how their perceive my faults (shoot the messenger rather than get the message itself).
In case anyone wants to dive into it, some resources to start with:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naïve...ïve realism,uninformed, irrational, or biased.
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/02...ays.&text=Comment:,marvel, but a fallible one.
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fas.../ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mi...books&sprefix=the+right,stripbooks,140&sr=1-1
Last edited:
Confusion of cognitive dissonance? Really? 🤦♂️
Why do you still claim that perceived difference is because of phase difference? I gave sound explanation why we hear AM file as different.
Do you really claim that audio volume going up and down, 43 times per second, is not something we ordinary hear, but we do only because of supposed phase change?