That may be, but the resulting sound each of us hears is further "modified" by our own equipment. So, if one fixed listener listens to the clips on two different systems that he/she may own, and these two systems have different sound characteristics, isn't it likely that the listener would choose two different clips as "best"?
In particular, this test doesn't help us determine which amp we may like best, since, again, we would be hearing the amp's sound through out own amps. And, it would seem foolish to daisy-chain two amps to get one's preferred sound...
The same argument can be said of one's own hearing apparatus - each person's own eardrum, inner ear bones, cochlea, cilliary receptors, nerve endings, our personal psychoacoustics, etc, all influence how we *perceive" sound. Does it make any sense to say that what you hear is modified by your own biological hearing so the only true way is to connect electrodes directly to your brain so you can hear electrical impulses devoid of the ear's acoustic imprint? Let's assume you have a decent amp and good headphones - you may not hear the same thing as if the amp was plugged into your own headphone, but a representation of it. Just as if you listened to a recording of music that you bought on a CD, it is a representation of it and still suitable for making an impression of whether or not you liked the recording.
I do...
Fair enough. If one holds their own system constant while auditioning the various files (as I am sure everyone would...), the differences between the amps in question may become apparent. Still, I would be concerned that if I preferred a certain clip, and subsequently built the amp based on that preference, that the sound may seem lacking because the sound of the amp on its own would differ from the sound of the clip through my system...
This is true of any DIY project, but I am hoping that this gives one more set of data points to make a choice in addition to the usual research via reading and other users' anecdotes. An in-person audition is always the ultimate test I suppose. But one thing about most of the headamps I build, just 2 transistors and maybe 10 resistors and a couple of caps - not much risk in it not working out.
The problem here is that the Wav files bit depth is undefined, so I assume 16 bit.
The recorded Wav files are not at exactly the same level, so the process of normalising will introduce differing errors, and the then conversion to MP3 further throws away information further obscuring any differences between the amplifiers.
You need a pilot/reference tone track in iTunes and a volume pot between iTunes and the DUTs to establish exact and consistent output level of the DUTs.
With the differences between amplifiers expected to be minimal, MP3 files are not suitable as audition material.
Dropbox links to Wav files, preferrably 24bit would be a much better method.
Dan.
The recorded Wav files are not at exactly the same level, so the process of normalising will introduce differing errors, and the then conversion to MP3 further throws away information further obscuring any differences between the amplifiers.
You need a pilot/reference tone track in iTunes and a volume pot between iTunes and the DUTs to establish exact and consistent output level of the DUTs.
With the differences between amplifiers expected to be minimal, MP3 files are not suitable as audition material.
Dropbox links to Wav files, preferrably 24bit would be a much better method.
Dan.
Erm.. Elephant in the room question remains:
Purpose.. of Poll?
Beyond your demonstrated addiction to 'polls'
Can one Not decide which is preferable in one's ears?
This a simple values reinforcement exercise Or some prelude to selling?
Religiously avoiding headphone listening entirely, I'm simply a curious passing spectator
Purpose.. of Poll?
Beyond your demonstrated addiction to 'polls'
Can one Not decide which is preferable in one's ears?
This a simple values reinforcement exercise Or some prelude to selling?
Religiously avoiding headphone listening entirely, I'm simply a curious passing spectator
The Focusrite is capable of 24bit resolution. The Audacity setting for the wav file is 32bit float so I suppose it is enough to handle the native resolution of the interface. I am using specific Focusrite provided drivers to allow the max resolution and speed (up to 192kHz).
XRK971. I have some comments which I offer as constructive in the context of your research. Rather than a poll, each of us can use a digital editor, and see if the files are comparable, (or not, as in this case) ; see the stereo mp3 / wav files in the Frequency Spectrum. See when they are well recorded, or clipping , etc, etc. Your first file is the best, recorded as a 16 bit wav file @48 Kilohertz and 1536 kbps, but leaving too much headroom. Files B to H were recorded as mp3 files at 48 Kilohertz and 320 kbits, at various levels, the highest, close to clipping was B, which everyone seems to like!. With the Digital Editor, each of us can listen through our own computer Audio System, and get a good idea, backed up spectrum observations, as to the quality of each digital file. The last (Reference File) was recorded as mp3 44.1 Kilohz and 320 kbps. Note that your files were not converted in this process. Keep- up the good work. John Lopez.
Thanks for the feedback John Lopez. I thought I had Audacity set to record as wav files at 48kHz 32bit on all clips. Not sure how first one ensed up being 16bits at 1536kbits (96kHz). I was hoping people will refrain from voting until I uploaded a new B sound clip that is free of the clipping artifacts.
If you used VBR mp3 you could have a longer section, depending on the complexity of the music. On solo piano (which is my preferred demanding music for evaluating kit) the datarate works out to be below 200kbits normally.
I would agree that differences between amps would still be discernible even though mp3 is used.
Well, may be it's just me, but why not pump those MP3 through spectralab and publish the results ? This way all the listeners uncertainty with headphones and amps is taken out completely and we have some sexy graphs to drool over.
For starters I'd start with 5 seconds FLAC silence and see how they fair with noise floor.
If one can easily discern a difference by just listening then I would lean towards that one or the other amp (and/or the sample) has some serious problem(s). They should sound all the same. Emphasis on should.
For starters I'd start with 5 seconds FLAC silence and see how they fair with noise floor.
If one can easily discern a difference by just listening then I would lean towards that one or the other amp (and/or the sample) has some serious problem(s). They should sound all the same. Emphasis on should.
I have measurements of THD, noise floor, IMD, SNR, dynamic range, stereo crosstalk etc. But it's important to listen and make a determination of what we like first before being swayed by the data. Noise floor on the best amp is about -123dB, best dynamic range is about 93dB. You will see all of this and the FFT when we reveal amps. Data taken with the Focusrite Solo 2G and Right Mark Audio Analyzer.
Very good test, thank you X!
This is quite valid in my view.
Despite using a short clip, and using mp3, and using my own Plantronics headphone and crappy sound card, it demonstrated the qualities of sound quality as I regard them; things like weight in the bass (a subjective analysis of the harmonic structure of bass instrumentations like double bass), forward vocal (indication of spatial qualities), clarity of words (intermodulation and distortion issues), performance with plosive and sibilant sounds of human voice (top of the frequencies range and distortion).
All these qualities are apparent in this comparo. Thank you X, this is excellence engineering. Of course, people will make mistakes; this is like wine tasting, so some (including me) will occasionally seem foolish...... but then only YOU know the option you chose!
HD
This is quite valid in my view.
Despite using a short clip, and using mp3, and using my own Plantronics headphone and crappy sound card, it demonstrated the qualities of sound quality as I regard them; things like weight in the bass (a subjective analysis of the harmonic structure of bass instrumentations like double bass), forward vocal (indication of spatial qualities), clarity of words (intermodulation and distortion issues), performance with plosive and sibilant sounds of human voice (top of the frequencies range and distortion).
All these qualities are apparent in this comparo. Thank you X, this is excellence engineering. Of course, people will make mistakes; this is like wine tasting, so some (including me) will occasionally seem foolish...... but then only YOU know the option you chose!
HD
Last edited:
Does anyone know what the transistor count in a Muses02 opamp is? Also the TI LME49600 current buffer? Is it in the tens or thirties? I think this listening test is a showcase of SE Class A zero global feedback topology vs balanced input LTP with CCS and complementary push-pull outputs with large global feedback. Moderate to low HD vs ultra low HD. Which sounds better? We will all see I guess.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.