The Black Hole......

Just now computer is something I know not what. It was a SOTA computer by ASUS a few years ago, 2T SS mem and latest and greatest processor etc etc.

With Windows one has to be very careful, but all three files most likely should have been equally messed up if Windows were responsible. Maybe not though. ASIO drivers and an app that can be configured to use ASIO are a must, IMHO. Foobar can be used with the optional ASIO component. Also, make sure the DAC does not have any green check next to it in the Windows Control Panel sound settings. See screenshot below for where to look for green check mark. To get rid of the green check symbol, there must be at least one extra sound device that can be set to the default sound device and to the default communications device.

Regarding reports of files sounding different, could be there is some ultrasonic content in the first file that some reproduction systems don't like. Might or might not vary with dac filter settings. One could try other systems, other dacs, other filters, etc., to see what if anything causes a change in symptoms.
 

Attachments

  • WinSoundConfig.jpg
    WinSoundConfig.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 183
Last edited:
I am fine with 24/96. 88 isnt needed as it isnt a standard.
Whaat?
1) 88.2kHz is one of the standard sampling frequencies used throughout the audio industry.
2) The file Hans used was derived from original, which was recorded as DXD i.e. at 352.8kHz / 24bits (see 2L web page).
3) 352.8 is multiple of 88.2. Sample rate conversion to some other, non integer Fs is not optimal. It is SRC 101.
 
This all kindly verifies my original assumption that one must dial their system specifically as they use it, and introducing changes/variables might not come across in the same fashion.

For example,my main system doesn’t sound as good when I use the Apple airplay for tidal vs the straight tidal app.
 
Just to show that the original stereo file, in my case used as the master file, and the 20Khz brick wall filtered stereo version are exactly the same below 20Khz including eventual muddiness, I have stretched the time axis.
The third stereo set in the image below is the difference between the two above, level magnified by a factor 25.
As you can see, the difference between the master and the filtered one is just HF above 20Khz. Below 20Khz the original and the BW filtered one are identical.

Hans

I am too old. I can hear changes to files based only on 20KHz filtering. Thats up to someone else now. But distortion I can hear.

So, I'll try a better system. I would like to know if it sounds better (A).

But, its still shows the variability amongst listeners. All over the map.

What is RealTek stereo MIX mode? Immediate mode? 24/48K ?

Not checked is "let appl take exclusive control of this device? Give exclusive mode appl priority?

I'll have to try different settings.



Thx-RNMarsh
 
Last edited:
Whaat?
1) 88.2kHz is one of the standard sampling frequencies used throughout the audio industry.
2) The file Hans used was derived from original, which was recorded as DXD i.e. at 352.8kHz / 24bits (see 2L web page).
3) 352.8 is multiple of 88.2. Sample rate conversion to some other, non integer Fs is not optimal. It is SRC 101.

Si.... I am thinking PRO... 24/96. My Crowns take 24/96 etc.

Not that 88 hasnt been used. I would not down load files that are 88. i would 96 because it is compatible with the kind of gear I buy.

I will try other than this funky computer then. BTW __ does anyone know if my computer is set to 48K and i put in 88... what happens? I just changed it to 88 and will listen again.

No. In my system I hear distortions.


THx-RNMarsh
 
Last edited:
Ha, ha, the only thing I was on to was to find out whether perceived differences have anything to do with other factors as level, upsampling filters, reconstruction filters or whatever that can manipulate the signal in the reproduction chain.
All these variables have been excluded in this test.

Hans
Just fill "normal rez" out sideways and downwards with random nicely tailored noise and everyone will be happy. We don't even have to distribute it - just a new feature in a DAC chip. (See MQA ;-))

//
 
😀😀😀

...
At first listen they all sounded similar to me. I went A->B->C, then again B, then C, then B.
B and C sounded the same to me. Then I went back to A and for a brief moment I thought it sounded slightly different from B and C. That's it. I could not detect any differences thereafter.

This was exactly how my session unfolded also. In the end I could not honestly say that I had a preference. So I voted equal.

//
 
I am fine with 24/96. 88 isnt needed as it isnt a standard. But would prefer 24/192 when available.

Only denial i might be in is 16/44 sounds the best. But then some dont hear any difference with any of them.

If they say I dont hear a difference, then are they in denial? No. they just dont hear a difference.

There are lots of people here who dont hear differences and thus the others are snake oil sales men for hearing differences.

I hope this test allows a bit more leeway in what variations people hear about this and other things audio.

THx-RNMarsh

And then there are those who prefer a tampered copy. No shame in that either.

//