This is the non-linear distortion that you have added, Karl.
http://pmacura.cz/lowbiasdistortion.zip
Quite awful sounding, right. Still, almost impossible to discern by listening. Non-linear distortion is far less audible than we might have supposed.
http://pmacura.cz/lowbiasdistortion.zip
Quite awful sounding, right. Still, almost impossible to discern by listening. Non-linear distortion is far less audible than we might have supposed.
Whoa ! Now that sounds just like a chronically under biased output stage with a large discontinuity around the crossover point.
This is really interesting with regard to the Texan and it seems as though this distortion could be a characteristic.
I've repeated the pure tone test with a simulation of my amp and I don't see anything like we are seeing with the Texan, which seems to show the simulation is possibly more accurate than we would have suspected. It really does seem to be adding all this junk on its own.
Creating a .wav from the simulation of my amp shows 'zero' artefacts of the kind we have seen above when I view it in Audacity which is like a double proof the idea works. So the PC isn't adding anything of its own to this.
All the artefacts you show from my Texan files, I see even using Audacity. Its bad 😀
This is really interesting with regard to the Texan and it seems as though this distortion could be a characteristic.
I've repeated the pure tone test with a simulation of my amp and I don't see anything like we are seeing with the Texan, which seems to show the simulation is possibly more accurate than we would have suspected. It really does seem to be adding all this junk on its own.
Creating a .wav from the simulation of my amp shows 'zero' artefacts of the kind we have seen above when I view it in Audacity which is like a double proof the idea works. So the PC isn't adding anything of its own to this.
All the artefacts you show from my Texan files, I see even using Audacity. Its bad 😀
Attachments
Quite awful sounding, right. Still, almost impossible to discern by listening. Non-linear distortion is far less audible than we might have supposed.
Yes and yes. I'll have more time later to try a real Foobar test on these.
I got a 10/10, a nine and then an eight, agree cc is dirtier, and the bass is different.I listened on the DAW computer. It sounds like cc has slightly more HF distortion than oo (in the frequency range I can still hear). But, it is slight and probably easy to loose track of in repeated listening as ear fatigue sets in.
Boredom with the music (Steely Dan is not my favorite, and I have never liked the recording/mix....and it's not all that clean despite having been used as a demo track since forever) and confusion about which track is which sets in...ie can hear the difference but assign it wrongly.
A few shorter sessions might be better than one long one.
Dan.
Dan, thanks for the update. Would you like to say what hardware you used for listening? Headphones, speakers, CD player, computer sound card, etc.,? Even cables, if you think that might be important?
Also, no doubt PMA would appreciate if you would post your ABX test result printouts from Foobar.
Also, no doubt PMA would appreciate if you would post your ABX test result printouts from Foobar.
Please post your results here as the text output from the ABX software. Otherwise it's not fair to claim 10/10.
Yes, the only proof is the ABX protocol. I have told it many times in this thread and shown how it looks.
Test your ears in my new ABX test
To post it is a necessary condition.
Test your ears in my new ABX test
To post it is a necessary condition.
agree cc is dirtier, and the bass is different.
You're sure?
Low bias vs normal bias and low bias vs the original mono mix file. Ho hum...
These were two consecutive runs, nothing discarded in between. Laptop and headphones for this one.
Impossible to discern to me too.
With the tone track was very easy but not with music.
When I know the track is playing I'm sure which is which but when I run the ABX test I fail.
Attachments
$5.00 USB dac plugged into Laptop > El cheapo 3.5mm-2RCA cable > Yamaha receiver > Stax electrostatic heaqdphones.Dan, thanks for the update. Would you like to say what hardware you used for listening? Headphones, speakers, CD player, computer sound card, etc.,? Even cables, if you think that might be important?
Also, no doubt PMA would appreciate if you would post your ABX test result printouts from Foobar.
I was doing it for quick bit of Friday night/bottle of red fun, got bored with it, didn't bother to save the results.Please post your results here as the text output from the ABX software. Otherwise it's not fair to claim 10/10.
If I do it again I will try loudspeakers also....IME direct/reflected/room sound shows up slight differences, more especially bass differences better than headphones.
Yes. Subjectively cc slight overall dirt/noise, bass doesn't go quite so deep and has slight 'boomy' quality, oo sounds smoother/muted in comparison/less 'shouty', less 'scattered'.You're sure?
Dan.

Last edited:
I was doing it for quick bit of Friday night/bottle of red fun, got bored with it, didn't bother to save the results.
Major cop out there especially after all your bragging. A screen shot takes less than a second to take.
oo sounds smoother/muted in comparison/
Yes, smoother and muted. Didn't sound quite optimal, some loss of HF, maybe due to having been compressed.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- General Interest
- Everything Else
- Test your ears in my new ABX test