This is what we get from quite good headphones from the test impulse. So we should be very careful when speaking about what we "hear". Top trace el. signal, bottom trace headphones+mike output.
P.S.: Frequency response of the headphone channel just added - it is not that bad. But time response is and this is the message to those who like to argue and debate about time response of the amplifiers - funny.
Attachments
Last edited:
For those totally board with DBT (probably by decades) I'd like to invite a peak at our new amplifier. I think some here will appreciate the anti-complexity of it (aside from the PVI part), and the distortion profiles. It isn't maybe what JC would like to see in some respects, but the sound is very good.
Well, I hope you are happy with your $99 CD player. I can't tolerate even those that cost 10 times as much, but then I listen with my ears, and don't like double blind tests BECAUSE they tend to make everything sound the same at the test moment, but differences still are apparent over time. . I still believe, after 40 years of trying, that ABX cripples the decision making process, and I stand by my opinion. At this time, I do not design digital players, so I can't blame my opinion on my own design preferences, when it comes to digital. I just try things, and decide for myself.
Last edited:
We have done that multiple times here, comparing between highly rated dacs such as Auralic Vega and Benchmark DAC-3. Easy to hear the difference blind at low-ish matched levels. It is a matter of learning what to listen for, something some people have no interest in learning how to do.
EDIT: Please don't mistake my one one-time response as an indicating I am willing to play debating games with you, I'm not.
Last edited:
Sorry, you're lack of toleration is nowhere near the level of this guy...
I don't know who to pity most
i don't confuse scientific research on localisation of human ears with the successive commercial holdups on the movies industry succeeded by the Dolby company. Multiplying loudspeakers and tracks is nothing innovative. Imposing their standards by all the possible pressures is nothing else than an hostage taken. Just dirty business. Just like was Sensurround by Universal Studios, or THX by Georges Lucas ...
On my point of view it will disappear in the forgetfulness of history as fast as the previous others.
Talking about snake oil or fashion ?
No, PMA, no, no and NO.
It is not for this reason. And i don't agree both with your contemptuous use of the word "audiophile", and the trial of intent.
I don't care to know what brand is the one playing at an instant. In fact I don't care to know-it or not, I am not snobbish or having preconceptions in matter of audio.
But I NEED to know if it is the A, or the B that is playing. Jut to can correlate my successive listening impressions. About ABX, it just adding a level of obfustration and fatigue, that does not help when you are about trying to discriminate little details.
And, because each surprize is a shock that divert attention , I need to be the master of the moment i want the switch to be made as well as the musical source.
Anyway, all this endless controversy is boring. Is there is not obvious differences between two gears or sources, why spending so many time and efforts: It means it does not matter much. Obvious, not ?
And not forget, as J.C said that long time listening (several days), specially with not focused attention can reveal things that you do not notice when too much focused at un instant.
And I agree too with what Markw4 answered.
Everybody is free to find the ways that works better for himself, we are not all the same.
Let this bu*.s.it controversy to oddharmonic's boring parrots messages in loop. You are better than that.
Plus some sprinkles of peeking, right?
You say all that because you are in audio business. I know.
You have not done level matched double blind listening test. What you claimed to have done is a pseudo level matched test.
Several days... that's got to be fatiguing. How these listeners can tolerate such stress during subjective listening sessions but not during double blind listening session is puzzling.
Several days... that's got to be fatiguing. How these listeners can tolerate such stress during subjective listening sessions but not during double blind listening session is puzzling.
My take on that was some nuances do not fully reveal themselves in a forced environment.......listening time is involved.
You're wasting your time telling him what everyone read & understood what was meant - he just wanted someone to reply as you have done - forget it - it's a religion with them
I'm not sure who told you that DBT has to be done within given timeline. As mentioned by late Peter Aczel in The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio #4, take as much time as you wish.
Yes, it was clear what you were trying to test, and a worthwhile test too. My point is that the inversion was easily apparent if, say, media player is your default for wav and shows the waveform... And you could easily look at the files in more detail. So, the replies are tainted by whether you can assume people have not noticed or have not looked. Trust is a tricky thing!
Ok....you wanna dance?
Why does one need to not know what he’s hearing to make a decision? Subjectivity can certainly be objective if you train your brain to act impartially......I could give two turds less what it is, if it sounds better to me than better it is!
Cost,pedigree,awesome reviews mean absolutely nothing to me......for example I’m boxing up a Hint right now because my lowly Yamaha sounds better! Now I’m hoping it’s fixable as I really hear the potential it has....but if it comes back from repair still blah and untimely then down the road it goes.
I don’t understand why all this blind testing is even a ‘thing’ ....let your ears and your brain guide your own opinion......if that’s not too foreign a concept?
Bob
Last edited:
To fulfill your request, I made an other listening (one time) with headphones.
This time, apart the difference of tonaly, I was able to "feel" a little difference in spatial position. The lowest tone sometimes on the left and sometimes on the right. But it falls into my category "If it's not an illusion, it does not matter enough to worry.". Only very little angle, if any.
I would have liked longest signals. If I have some time, I will edit them.
Was-it a test to evaluate our thresholds of phase localisation ?
We can hear spaciousness because of reflections/echoes. The direct sound together with the reflections get into our ears and with experience our brain knows the relative position of the direct sound sources and the reflective surroundings. So the vertical information can be in the recording depends on how it is captured. Imo, the best way to capture 3D is by using single microphone, then in reproduction the speaker/room must be free from reflections. But this is a rare case. Recording people seem to prefer closed mic for each instrument. Of course, the 3D information (from surrounding reflections) is not there. It has to be added during mixing. This 3D engineering plus speaker/room reflection creates its own 3D imaginations.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.