The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Launch of Pono Studio Headphones
Old 7th April 2014
  #2491
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Ok, someone can set up a test for me like this.

Come on over, play the CD and SACD of a few records that I know were both done properly, and play them for me through my speakers, AT phones, or other good system that I can have time to get to know.

I'll give a few examples, 'DSOTM', 'Brand New Day', '52nd Street', 'Kind Of Blue', 'Abraxas'.

Level match them, don't level match them, make the CD louder, softer, whatever, I really don't give a sht, I'll tell you which is which 100 out of 100 times.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2492
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

And if you want to give me this BS about it being because of different mastering (of course the DSD will just happen to have better mastering in 5 out of 5 cases), I'll suggest this.

Take the best 44.1 A to D you can find and copy the DSD onto a CD. Then they should be identical right? I'll still tell you which is which every time.



------

And no, I'm not suggesting that my hearing is so far superior. A lot of other people will be able to tell the difference too.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2493
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinupmysleeve View Post
It was a good read indeed! He's obviously smarter and more knowledgeable than I am.

I had a couple things I want to point out...



If this is true that it's audible, why have people failed to pick it out in abx testing? Regarding testing, he had this to say:



Not a very science-ish answer is it?

It's a similar answer to the tapeop piece, but I have to ask... et again... if it's all so subtle that it can't be heard in blind testing, then can it really be that significant? I'm asking not knowing the answer... it seems intrinsically to me that it probably is NOT that important, but if I'm wrong.. WHY am I wrong? WHY are these extremely subtle things that cannot be heard in blind testing important?

AND... especially considering moving your head a few inches in either direction in a normal room will have a much much more significant impact than the difference in sample rate... how can ANYONE be so certain they are hearing something other than confirmation bias or placebo effect?

I just do not get it... maybe my brain is broken.

I also don't get how people here STILL have not done an a/b/x test on their own, yet continue to talk about how easily it is to hear the difference. Makes no sense to me.
Yeah... I read that some time ago and reread some today -- and the way he soft soaps some of the sticky issues for the audiophile magazine it's in is pretty amusing. But I thought his bit of evasion on the ABX thing was pretty silly.

Basically it just about seemed to come down to, well ABX is the right way to test, but in our development work we don't always have time, so we go with our impressions and just hope that we're not fooling ourselves. Please feel free to correct me if his statement can be parsed to a significantly different meaning.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2494
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
Unknown files, over the internet, played through my computer and sound card, having no idea what the files are, what parameters my computer's operating system and sound card it is capable of, into my phones?
Really? You can download the files and see for yourself (these are audio files, not virus-laden executables). By your comments I take it that you don't record on your computer. So what do you do when a client sends you audio files? Whatever that is, do it with the flacs that bandpass posted.

Quote:
And how do I compare DSD?
Comparing DSD would require significantly more effort.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Quote:
In the studio, with your brand new creations, high resolution is a great option. Resolutions are all different in their depths and textures. These can be used, and mixed together. A hook can be recorded in a higher resolution than the track it sits on, further setting it apart in your creation. So can a vocal. Resolution is a new tool for you to use. As long as you mix in the highest resolution found in your creation, or higher, everything will be captured. Especially, real echo and acoustic instruments, like drums, benefit from higher resolutions. Don’t take anyone’s word for this. Listen for yourself. Make your own decision. It’s an artistic right you have.


WTF does this mean?

We're going to record different instruments with different bits and sample frequencies?

And the audience is going to hear it that way?

Pono can play them all back from within a stereo file?
Neil has sailed the rest of the way 'round the bend.

God love him.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2496
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
Because blind testing is insensitive, an audio stunt, and getting familiar with the sound of a thing gives you more of the overall gestalt of it over time.
Nothing in ABX prevents you from becoming familiar with the "overall gestalt" of whatever it is you're testing. Listen to it for 5 years if that's what it takes. As has been demonstrated many times, once you notice something -- a subtle timbre change, or a doubled guitar part that you once thought was just one guitar -- you always hear it.

And then you should be able to ABX it.

Quote:
That's why overkill with sound quality works. The best possible overkill is a live acoustic performance. The flood of musical intention at times like that is overwhelming. Electric performances can also go a long way beyond the amount of information we get out of 16/44.1 or 320K mp3.
Care to explain why the above is true? What's the science behind your claim?
Old 7th April 2014
  #2497
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Basically it just about seemed to come down to, well ABX is the right way to test, but in our development work we don't always have time, so we go with our impressions and just hope that we're not fooling ourselves. Please feel free to correct me if his statement can be parsed to a significantly different meaning.
You know, a lot of us who earn our living year in and year out doing audio stuff that people actively want to hear, could say the same. We go with our impressions, we check up on ourselves from time to time (don't want to be caught attentively adjusting an EQ that's not patched in) but on the whole we just use such reality checks as reference points and spend most of our working time 'going deeper' and paying attention to things below the threshold of what you could ABX.

This ain't math. (well, digital summing is, but you know how much we loooove that! ) It's sensory experience to elicit human feelings and reactions, and if people who are familiar with how to make that happen are saying the same things to you maybe you should listen.

I could propose a counter validity test. If you have made creative decisions on sounds or tools to make sounds, that earned more than ten thousand dollars (for you, or the artist, or a record company), then you get to have an opinion. If you didn't make sounds or tools to make sounds which earned that much money, maybe you don't get to tell working audio professionals they're imagining things.

We could raise the bar to a hundred thousand dollars. I would still be in there. (I don't still have it, I spent it on housing and food and keeping decripit cars on the road! :D ) I'm pretty sure Chad, who posted that link, would be in there. I'm not sure how many of the blind testing crowd would (no doubt some would, which is fine: variety and debate are good).

We could raise the bar to a million dollars. Neil Young would be in there. I'm sure his creative decisions (actively chosen, too!) on sound qualities have earned more than a million dollars for record labels, and he's the one being most hyperbolic. I might need to be listening to HIM more closely on the 192K stuff, and I might be wrong about 44.1K being adequate. From a certain perspective, he should have more say than me. I'd jump to 96K in a heartbeat if I had the A/D for it (my D/A is already good for 96K).

This isn't about proof or disproof, it's about more effectively creating sensory impressions, and we are not all created equal there, and being better at it has practical results measured in dollars.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2498
Lives for gear
 
bogosort's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
I could propose a counter validity test. If you have made creative decisions on sounds or tools to make sounds, that earned more than ten thousand dollars (for you, or the artist, or a record company), then you get to have an opinion. If you didn't make sounds or tools to make sounds which earned that much money, maybe you don't get to tell working audio professionals they're imagining things.
Wow. Just wow.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2499
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bogosort View Post
Wow. Just wow.
We could do both tests at once!

Only people who have earned ten thousand dollars for anybody making creative decisions about sound or tools to make sound, AND who can pass at least 95% confidence on a 20-trial ABX blind test, get to make any decision. For every last decision both tests must be passed or it doesn't count and is not used.

Nothing would ever happen again, and we could all go home

Or we can keep listening to sounds and forming opinions about them…
Old 7th April 2014
  #2500
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bogosort View Post
Really? You can download the files and see for yourself (these are audio files, not virus-laden executables). By your comments I take it that you don't record on your computer. So what do you do when a client sends you audio files? Whatever that is, do it with the flacs that bandpass posted.



Comparing DSD would require significantly more effort.

You don't say? Something, perhaps, like a REAL test?
Old 7th April 2014
  #2501
Lives for gear
 
paul brown's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
You know, a lot of us who earn our living year in and year out doing audio stuff
you might not want to mention this as a qualifier to your opinion having more validity. you could introduce expert bias, also known as the logical fallacy arguing from authority. also maybe some survivorship bias based on how you rate your success and the reason why it happened.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2502
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
You know, a lot of us who earn our living year in and year out doing audio stuff that people actively want to hear, could say the same. We go with our impressions, we check up on ourselves from time to time (don't want to be caught attentively adjusting an EQ that's not patched in) but on the whole we just use such reality checks as reference points and spend most of our working time 'going deeper' and paying attention to things below the threshold of what you could ABX.

This ain't math. (well, digital summing is, but you know how much we loooove that! ) It's sensory experience to elicit human feelings and reactions, and if people who are familiar with how to make that happen are saying the same things to you maybe you should listen.

I could propose a counter validity test. If you have made creative decisions on sounds or tools to make sounds, that earned more than ten thousand dollars (for you, or the artist, or a record company), then you get to have an opinion. If you didn't make sounds or tools to make sounds which earned that much money, maybe you don't get to tell working audio professionals they're imagining things.

We could raise the bar to a hundred thousand dollars. I would still be in there. (I don't still have it, I spent it on housing and food and keeping decripit cars on the road! :D ) I'm pretty sure Chad, who posted that link, would be in there. I'm not sure how many of the blind testing crowd would (no doubt some would, which is fine: variety and debate are good).

We could raise the bar to a million dollars. Neil Young would be in there. I'm sure his creative decisions (actively chosen, too!) on sound qualities have earned more than a million dollars for record labels, and he's the one being most hyperbolic. I might need to be listening to HIM more closely on the 192K stuff, and I might be wrong about 44.1K being adequate. From a certain perspective, he should have more say than me. I'd jump to 96K in a heartbeat if I had the A/D for it (my D/A is already good for 96K).

This isn't about proof or disproof, it's about more effectively creating sensory impressions, and we are not all created equal there, and being better at it has practical results measured in dollars.
LOL

Recourse to 'success story'-based authority. Often the last refuge of those who have run out of facts and logic. (I won't weigh in on whether or not that's the case in this particular instance. But it's a patently suspect rhetorical tack.)


Do any of the Statesiders in this forum remember in the 70s when there was this self-made millionaire who had a book and seminars on flipping real estate properties to make millions of dollar? The adverts were everywhere, magazines, expensive half and full page newspaper ads in major dailies like the LA Times. ($40K per full page ad in their heyday, back when $40K was probably more like $100K today).

He'd have a picture of himself in front of his McMansion or his yacht and cite himself as the prime example of how it was a sure-fire plan for success.

One of the guys in one of my first bands worked for the guy as a personal assistant when the investment author was still alive. After the author died, his widow hired my friend to ghost write a new edition of the book. The original and revised editions were just basic real estate investment how-to's with no new info or ideas, he said, just buy low, leverage your debt, sell high.

Not too long after the revised edition of the book came out, the fraud and tax prosecutions began, because it turned out that the 'real estate investment genius' was simply running a good, old-fashioned Ponzi (pyramid) scheme.

So, you know, ever since then, when someone pulls out the this'll-impress-the-rubes big talk and self-promoted authority, I just write them off, right there.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2503
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
LOL

Recourse to 'success story'-based authority. Often the last refuge of those who have run out of facts and logic. (I won't weigh in on whether or not that's the case in this particular instance. But it's a patently suspect rhetorical tack.)
Yes, well that is exactly fitting for the guy in the link everyone keeps shoving our way. I never heard of him, but he sure talks big about himself, and promises to publish the story of the "winner" of this challenge. Where is it published, on his website?
Old 7th April 2014
  #2504
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul brown View Post
you might not want to mention this as a qualifier to your opinion having more validity. you could introduce expert bias, also known as the logical fallacy arguing from authority. also maybe some survivorship bias based on how you rate your success and the reason why it happened.
I might not want to mention the current state of my bank account either!

I rate my success as this: I really, really hate CDs and digital audio and in fact a heck of a lot of vinyl records after the Seventies. (maybe the guy insisting they all changed to 14 bit digital is right! ) And I've been able to make digital mixes, in the box, that remind me of what I always liked about the vinyl records I so adored. And now that there's Pono, it's inspired me to get even more hardcore about it, and I'm even more pleased with the results of that. Why did it happen? Beats me. It certainly isn't my ingratiating personality

I'll defer to Neil. He can be the one with the opinion with validity. He also gets a mean dirty guitar tone, and he can mix bass so it hits you in the chest. That's all the validity I need.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2505
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Neil has sailed the rest of the way 'round the bend.

God love him.
Or he's just putting forth a somewhat contorted-words version of what some people that use, say an SP1200 for some of the parts in their music, do every day.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2506
I added this to an earlier post a few minutes after I wrote it but the fast-moving dialog had moved on, so I'm moving it here:

Me, I'm a nobody, a failed poet, a uni lib arts dropout -- and no one should believe anything I say just because I say it. And by the 'standards' posed above, I mean, I have no reason to think that the biggest record I ever worked on sold more than about 30,000 units. (Hmm... could we base that dollar-amount-based authority on aggregate retail? I think I could make that first $100K threshold in that case. Gee... I feel smarter and more knowledgeable already. heh )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
Yes, well that is exactly fitting for the guy in the link everyone keeps shoving our way. I never heard of him, but he sure talks big about himself, and promises to publish the story of the "winner" of this challenge. Where is it published, on his website?
I've read Justin Colletti's stuff in Tape Op and elsewhere for some time now. He's written a lot and worked a lot. His c.v. is here: About & Clients

But, for sure, don't trust Colletti or anyone else just because you recognize the name.

Trust them if they base their conclusions on solid evidence and valid logic.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2507
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
Unknown files, over the internet, played through my computer and sound card, having no idea what the files are, what parameters my computer's operating system and sound card it is capable of, into my phones?

What kind of of test is that? And how do I compare DSD?
If you don't like the criteria, make up you own! But the point is to test. It doesn't even take that much work!

As I suggested earlier... simply buy a 24/96 file. Filter all frequencies above say 24k. Do an a/b/x.

Same thing, but convert it to 44.1/16. Do an a/b/x.

It's actually pretty simple to do on your own these days.

If you succeed in identifying the higher sample rate version, then please upload both versions for people to have a listen to and test ourselves to make sure there aren't any inconsistencies. Maybe you will be the one!

Oh and re: DSD, I don't know, that's not what we're testing. Pono is not DSD. The easiest thing to test is high frequencies/sample rate.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2508
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
But, for sure, don't trust Colletti or anyone else just because you recognize the name.

Trust them if they base their conclusions on solid evidence and valid logic.
How very Vulcan, sir.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2509
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
You don't say? Something, perhaps, like a REAL test?
I really don't understand your negativity. Do the test yourself and report back. It's not hard (except for DSD which nobody is really arguing).

Why are you so reluctant?
Old 7th April 2014
  #2510
Lives for gear
 
paul brown's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
it's inspired me to get even more hardcore about it, and I'm even more pleased with the results of that.

I'll defer to Neil.
that is great if pono stimulates your creativity. i'm all for creative stimulants!

i don't defer to Neil if he is writing the marketing drivel that is coming out of the pono press office with his name attached to it.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2511
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
Or he's just putting forth a somewhat contorted-words version of what some people that use, say an SP1200 for some of the parts in their music, do every day.
This! I have to wonder if, just as there are EDM guys going nutso for genuine vintage Roland 808s, there are hiphop guys who are really into their Akai SP1200s and feel they have never successfully really captured the vibe of the thing on CD.

Seems unlikely but these pieces DO have a real following and a high resale value, and they're even used live like one might use a guitar and amp. Neil's talking about a real thing, it might seem like it's in code to people who aren't familiar with the technology.

I tried to make a SP-1200like plugin once. I failed, though it did still sound interesting. Chad Clark suggested it should be called Bit Glitter after one of the controls, and now it is. Never did really capture the 1200 mojo, though. It's clearly not just 'bit crush and reduce data', it's a distinctive color that could be fully reproduced using Pono, alongside more high-resolution recordings.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2512
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
Never did really capture the 1200 mojo, though.
You would have been first.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2513
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
You know, a lot of us who earn our living year in and year out doing audio stuff that people actively want to hear, could say the same. We go with our impressions, we check up on ourselves from time to time (don't want to be caught attentively adjusting an EQ that's not patched in) but on the whole we just use such reality checks as reference points and spend most of our working time 'going deeper' and paying attention to things below the threshold of what you could ABX.
I will take that as a partial answer... maybe you are granting that you cannot hear it in a/b/x testing? Is that what you are doing in a roundabout way?

Quote:
I could propose a counter validity test. If you have made creative decisions on sounds or tools to make sounds, that earned more than ten thousand dollars (for you, or the artist, or a record company), then you get to have an opinion. If you didn't make sounds or tools to make sounds which earned that much money, maybe you don't get to tell working audio professionals they're imagining things.
Ahh... so here we go. Money = knowledge. Interesting. Maybe you should be on the US Supreme Court, they seem to agree with you.

Do you REALLY think ability to earn money impacts ability to hear good music? So... say, Taylor Swift will be a better choice of what is relevant from an audio perspective than Dan Lavry?

Quote:
This isn't about proof or disproof, it's about more effectively creating sensory impressions, and we are not all created equal there, and being better at it has practical results measured in dollars.
It's about both, actually. Anything that creates more of a sensory impression can be quantified and tested for according to existing scientific principles.

Art is full of magical thinking, creativity, coming up with stuff out of thin air.

The delivery of sound is not.

Nobody denies the possibility that some magical x factor will come into existence later that we didn't expect, that science doesn't know how to look for. That is the way science works. It adjusts based on new data.

But you don't simply accept magical thinking because you are afraid of the results, or you are unable to quantify, or because you think you make more money than people with different opinions (If I were you Chris I would delete that post, it is completely beneath you and beneath anyone with a logical mind).
Old 7th April 2014
  #2514
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul brown View Post
i don't defer to Neil if he is writing the marketing drivel that is coming out of the pono press office with his name attached to it.
Well then: if Neil is writing 'marketing drivel' claiming that you can hear the difference between high resolution and, say, 320K mp3… and if I have done an ABX test and distinguished between high resolution and 320K mp3 to greater than 95% confidence, does that make it stop being marketing drivel, or do you only accept it if it's Neil doing the ABX test?

It makes this whole line of discourse very weird since I (unlike most) HAVE done an ABX test and aced it. I feel that gives me some grounds for telling what things would be obvious and what would not. I'd be able to do that cymbals 'sample rate' one, perhaps by editing it down to the most revealing moments, but I would not be able to do the classical one with the harpsichord, and I wouldn't be able to do wow/flutter based ones as I've already determined I can't hear that stuff so well.

I wouldn't be able to do the cymbal thing over just any speakers, either. The NS-10s are toppy enough that you get a sense of it. I'd also be able to use my Senn HD600s: I actually stripped away the stuff protecting the drivers so they're bare, and I'd be running it off a Lavry DA10 which has a killer headphone amp. That's what I'm driving the NS10s with.

Did anyone ever port an ABX tester to OSX? I know I didn't. The same people on Usenet wouldn't even stop arguing or slow down even when you passed their ABX tests, so I rather lost interest. It's just dominance behavior, really. If one person passes the test, they turn around and say that nobody else would hear such a thing. Best to just be enthusiastic about good stuff that's worth being enthusiastic about

it's also worth looking for vested interests. 'xiphmont' is the developer of Ogg Vorbis, a lossy encoder. It's not surprising that he throws every possible argument and attempted moral authority behind invalidating Pono, because it's an existential challenge to his whole lifework. Sad, but I still don't like Vorbis better than FLAC (though it IS better than mp3).

My vested interest is opposite. I think the plugins I do will compare better to my plugin rivals in a high-resolution world, so I am very eager to see Pono succeed. No, it's already succeeded. I want to see 'listen to stuff and get used to it and see how it sits with you, even if it's digital audio, because only the continuing experience of working with the sound will really tell you how good it is'… I want to see that succeed. I think that would help me and I want to see that approach become more popular.

Oddly, blind tests are also my friends, because everybody else does prettier virtual faceplates than me. But the 'live with it' factor is really the best.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2515
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
Because blind testing is insensitive,
We hardly need a very "sensitive" test when the differences are so enormous!

I don't need to SEE THE FISH in order to know when I am "underwater".

The ABX software is free. You can test yourself in the privacy of your own home. Nobody has to know. Well not quite true - you will know. Many ABX tests can be "forced choice" which rather than being 'insensitive' can allow peoples subconscious hunches to play out statistically over time. The people who are afraid of blind testing make these wimpy little arguments against it. Which would almost be reasonable if we were talking about a teeny tiny subtle difference that maybe conditions have to be just right in order to hear it.

But Hi-Res Audio not that kind of tiny difference, supposedly. Remember, this is the same HUGE Night and Day difference that people staggered out of Neil's car going: "WOW" about! The same difference that justifies asking consumers to:
1. buy an expensive new player
2. fit fewer songs in that player
3. repurchase all their favorite recordings
4. pay a premium price for those new recordings

Yet here in this thread, even the people ADVOCATING for higher sampling rates don't have enough confidence in the hi-res product to listen to it with their eyes closed! To even try it privately just once.

Quote:
We are getting a distinct and new player, with a distinct and new mode of attending to it
You have been very clear about your HOPES that the new mode of attending to it will "come along" with the new player. I predict it won't. You predict it will, but your prediction is just as much of a guess as mine. IMO, on several occasions now, you have come very close to saying here that it doesn't even matter if Pono sounds better or not, as long at it changes the way people listen to music back to the way they used to listen to music. Is this about right?

Is it even moral to push something we know doesn't make That Much Difference by pretending it does? Even for "their own good"? And we know it doesn't make That Much Difference because we have to make excuses about how 'difficult' the test is. As Kenny put it so perfectly - it's debatable. If its debatable, then it's a small difference. At best.

I also don't think it is wise to hitch your "attending" wagon to this player and these files. HOW people listen to music, and WHICH product they buy, are not inherently connected and it is a big mistake to try and force that connection, because if it fails, you lose your last chance to influence them on this topic.

Old 7th April 2014
  #2516
Gear Maniac
 

Great Post.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2517
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
ABX on OSX - Hydrogenaudio Forums

Please make an OSX tester application that'll run on 10.6.8 and handles twenty trials (five is completely inadequate) and 24-bit 96K files. I can do the editing and level matching in Amadeus with no trouble and provide what I used.

I've already done my part by porting an ABX tester to classic Macintosh, back in the day. I could even upload it and link you to it, but I don't run MacOS 9 anymore and we can't use the Classic environment. You're telling me to do development work free just to please your whims, and one normally pays programmers to do programming work. Demanding (insensitive) tests and not providing the test mechanism and then claiming the people are refusing to do the test because they know they'll fail is dishonest. I've already said which 'example files' I'd be able to do and which I wouldn't. Nothing human could ABX sample rate differences on a 1K test tone, so it's all shades of gray, not a binary 'these people are telling lies about audio' thing, anyway.

Show me the ABX tester that runs on OSX 10.6.8 or settle down a bit. Nobody is refusing to take tests because they have been lying and posturing all this time. What possible motive would there be for doing that, when the safe bet is clearly to join the hecklers and remain uncriticized?
Old 7th April 2014
  #2518
Awesome, the guy at 384k is wearing a jet pack with duel machine guns shooting the lesser audio listeners.
Old 7th April 2014
  #2519
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
ABX on OSX - Hydrogenaudio Forums

Please make an OSX tester application that'll run on 10.6.8 and handles twenty trials (five is completely inadequate) and 24-bit 96K files.
ABXer doesn't work for you, or you just can't find the download ?
some one actually posted here about a new one they just developed, kinda looks a lot like foobar or whatever
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-...-software.html
i don't even waste my time with these dumb abx tests because the difference to me is so obvious it's embarrassing to even have to take the test... (jk)
Old 7th April 2014
  #2520
Lives for gear
 
nuthinupmysleeve's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisj View Post
Well then: if Neil is writing 'marketing drivel' claiming that you can hear the difference between high resolution and, say, 320K mp3… and if I have done an ABX test and distinguished between high resolution and 320K mp3 to greater than 95% confidence, does that make it stop being marketing drivel, or do you only accept it if it's Neil doing the ABX test?
I would completely accept it, speaking for myself.

I have tried 320 vs. 24/96 and I can't hear it. Maybe you can?

I have tried 44.1 vs. 24/96 and I can't hear that either.

I'm guessing the former is much more likely... I'm sure someone with excellent hearing might be able to find artifacts in the mp3 that could be a "tell."

However, I'm more interested in the latter... 16/44.1 vs 24/96. That to me is the REAL PONO test.

Looking forward to your results!!

As far as ABX tester only having 5x... can't you run it multiple times to have the same testing result? Or is that not enough?
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump