| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
MikeEnRegalia 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
 Posted: January 21 2006 at 12:44 |
 oliverstoned wrote:
The-Bullet wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
To sum up: -Separate electric lines give a strong upgrade on dynamic, image (at least 30% more!!!) -Power filtering removes A LOT OF harshness (it's very useful on CD and you can double and even triple filter, each time it's softer )and you upgrade also on dynamic, detail, transparency. These are huge upgrade on a musical system (not necessary expensive). A good system CAN'T works without that. A big system without power optimization is a joke. And, yes when i plug the washing machines or the computer while i listen, it degrades sound wheras i've got separated lines...strange isn't it? it's actually because the different electric lines/devices disturb itselves at the level of the home counter. Top power filter by Transparent audio:  |
I've not done A/B tests on power filtration and the like so I can't comment one way or the other, but there is a heck of a lot of debate out there refering to double blind tests and the fact that rarely if ever can people tell when such devices are used. These sceptics point to the fact that people only "hear" these differences when they are aware visually what equipment is being used.
|
The problem is you have to have a good system to perform valid tests. So, what was the set up? |
It is all described in the pdf that I linked to above:
"The ABX methodology requires device A and device B to be levelmatched within ±0.1 dB, after which you can listen to fully identified A and fully identified B for as long as you like. If you then think they sound different, you are asked to identify X, which may be either A or B (as determined by a double-blind randomization process). You are allowed to make an A/X or B/X comparison at any time, as many times as you like, to decide whether X=A or X=B. Since sheer guessing will yield the correct answer 50% of the time, a minimum of 12 trials is needed for statistical validity (16 is better, 20 better yet). There is no better way to determine scientifically whether you are just claiming to hear a difference or can actually hear one."
|
|
|
 |
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097
|
Posted: January 21 2006 at 22:30 |
|
He means hardware system rather than a conceptual one.
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 22 2006 at 04:24 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
The-Bullet wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
To sum up: -Separate electric lines give a strong upgrade on dynamic, image (at least 30% more!!!) -Power filtering removes A LOT OF harshness (it's very useful on CD and you can double and even triple filter, each time it's softer )and you upgrade also on dynamic, detail, transparency. These are huge upgrade on a musical system (not necessary expensive). A good system CAN'T works without that. A big system without power optimization is a joke. And, yes when i plug the washing machines or the computer while i listen, it degrades sound wheras i've got separated lines...strange isn't it? it's actually because the different electric lines/devices disturb itselves at the level of the home counter. Top power filter by Transparent audio: |
I've not done A/B tests on power filtration and the like so I can't comment one way or the other, but there is a heck of a lot of debate out there refering to double blind tests and the fact that rarely if ever can people tell when such devices are used. These sceptics point to the fact that people only "hear" these differences when they are aware visually what equipment is being used.
|
The problem is you have to have a good system to perform valid tests. So, what was the set up? |
It is all described in the pdf that I linked to above:
"<FONT face=AGaramond-Regular size=2>The ABX methodology requires device A and device B to be levelmatched within ±0.1 dB, after which you can listen to fully identified A and fully identified B for as long as you like. If you then think they sound different, you are asked to identify X, <FONT face=AGaramond-Regular size=2>which may be either A or B (as determined by a double-blind randomization process). You are allowed to make an A/X or B/X comparison at any time, as many times as you like, to decide whether X=A or X=B. Since sheer guessing will yield the correct answer 50% of the time, a minimum of 12 trials is needed for statistical validity (16 is better, 20 better yet). There is no better way to determine scientifically whether you are just claiming to hear a difference or can actually hear one." |
Without a minimum of neutrality and transparency on the system, these tests means nothing.
Edited by oliverstoned
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 22 2006 at 04:26 |
goose wrote:
He means hardware system rather than a conceptual one. |
Yes, that's what i meant. I don't speak about theories and mathematical formulas, i don't mind about it.
|
|
daz2112
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 18 2006
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 4483
|
Posted: January 22 2006 at 11:35 |
I love my i pod  Have had mp3 players but i pod is the best for me
|
|
In the constellation of cygnus,There lurks a mysterious force...The black hole
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 22 2006 at 11:56 |
oliverstoned wrote:
Without a minimum of neutrality and transparency on the system, these tests means nothing
|
That's a typical example for audiophile logic. They refuse ANY listening test anywhere else but at their home, which is not practical.
The whole discussion is laughable anyway. Why should anyone invest ridiculous amounts of money in systems which even audiophiles cannot tell apart from standard hifi components under neutral conditions? Even if these systems really had a better sound quality, the difference is so small that it cannot possible be worth that money.
Remember that one can enjoy music even with the crappiest equipment. Listening to music on a 100,000 $ system will give you more joy than listening to music on a 1,000 $ system.
|
|
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 22 2006 at 12:38 |
|
"Why should anyone invest ridiculous amounts of money in systems which even audiophiles cannot tell apart from standard hifi components under neutral conditions? Even if these systems really had a better sound quality, the difference is so small that it cannot possible be worth that money."
Its the kind of argument of someone who has never heard a good system. And thats normal.
But by a simple listening, some of your bright theories would collapse in 30 seconds.
"Remember that one can enjoy music even with the crappiest equipment. Listening to music on a 100,000 $ system will give you more joy than listening to music on a 1,000 $ system."
True if systems are good and musical for the price.
I have never said that you can't enjoy music at all without good equipment.
I'm just trying to explain that it exists good things in Hifi which allow to have more pleasure and emotion with music than on a standard system.
And the differences i'm talking about are not small.
For example, compare the vague buzz that can makes a bass line on a normal system, and the powerful, deep but tense low that can provides a good sub -well fitted and well feed on power-, as if the bass player is in the room.
Edited by oliverstoned
|
|
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 25 2005
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 3254
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 06:30 |
192kbps mp3 file on headphones is PAINFUL to listen to...i can't get it why ye dont see the TREMENDOUS difference. 
Ive played the same Music file ripped from cd at 192kbps on a mp3 player that costs TWICE as much as my discman with the same headphones(Or just standard earplugs) and the general loss is so big i will never listen to a mp3 file ever again using HEADPHONES.
On my pc speakers i however dont mind playing back mp3 files at 192kbps...but with headphones where you can really hear all the details it is just a PAINFUL listening experience...
If not anyone hears a BIG difference from cd to mp3 192 they have to be deaf
Edited by Lindsay Lohan
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 06:56 |
oliverstoned wrote:
True if systems are good and musical for the price.
I have never said that you can't enjoy music at all without good equipment.
|
So you would agree that I can enjoy music with my Harman Kardon system?
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 06:56 |
Lindsay Lohan wrote:
192kbps mp3 file on headphones is PAINFUL to listen to...i can't get it why ye dont see the TREMENDOUS difference.
Ive played the same Music file ripped from cd at 192kbps on a mp3 player that costs TWICE as much as my discman with the same headphones(Or just standard earplugs) and the general loss is so big i will never listen to a mp3 file ever again using HEADPHONES.
On my pc speakers i however dont mind playing back mp3 files at 192kbps...but with headphones where you can really hear all the details it is just a PAINFUL listening experience...
If not anyone hears a BIG difference from cd to mp3 192 they have to be deaf
|
Maybe your headphones are too good.
|
|
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 07:52 |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
oliverstoned wrote:
True if systems are good and musical for the price. I have never said that you can't enjoy music at all without good equipment.
|
So you would agree that I can enjoy music with my Harman Kardon system? |
Of course i do.
Before discovering hifi, i was enjoying music also.
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 07:53 |
Lindsay Lohan wrote:
192kbps mp3 file on headphones is PAINFUL to listen to...i can't get it why ye dont see the TREMENDOUS difference.
Ive played the same Music file ripped from cd at 192kbps on a mp3 player that costs TWICE as much as my discman with the same headphones(Or just standard earplugs) and the general loss is so big i will never listen to a mp3 file ever again using HEADPHONES.
On my pc speakers i however dont mind playing back mp3 files at 192kbps...but with headphones where you can really hear all the details it is just a PAINFUL listening experience...
If not anyone hears a BIG difference from cd to mp3 192 they have to be deaf |
Here's the truth from someone who opens his ears a little.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 08:07 |
oliverstoned wrote:
Lindsay Lohan wrote:
192kbps mp3 file on headphones is PAINFUL to listen to...i can't get it why ye dont see the TREMENDOUS difference.
Ive played the same Music file ripped from cd at 192kbps on a mp3 player that costs TWICE as much as my discman with the same headphones(Or just standard earplugs) and the general loss is so big i will never listen to a mp3 file ever again using HEADPHONES.
On my pc speakers i however dont mind playing back mp3 files at 192kbps...but with headphones where you can really hear all the details it is just a PAINFUL listening experience...
If not anyone hears a BIG difference from cd to mp3 192 they have to be deaf |
Here's the truth from someone who opens his ears a little. |
I never said that there is no big difference between 192kbps mp3 and CD. I just said that I can life with that difference. Others may not, and that's their decision. But I'd appreciate if you could accept that I can enjoy music on my mobile player, in that format.
|
|
|
|
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 08:11 |
oliverstoned wrote:
Before discovering hifi, i was enjoying music also. |
Quoted because that's so much more funny than it's meant to be 
Edited by goose
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 08:24 |
Happy that it makes you laugh 
I admit that you can enjoy music on your mobile player.
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 08:27 |
 oh the joy!
|
|
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 08:46 |
You should asked me this question before!
Yes, you have half of the music, but you enjoy it.
And your brain works to reconstitute the informations missing. It may involve a headache, although.
Edited by oliverstoned
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21196
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 10:51 |
oliverstoned wrote:
You should asked me this question before!
Yes, you have half of the music, but you enjoy it.
And your brain works to reconstitute the informations missing. It may involve a headache, although. |
aha - we seem to agree, but we don't. I have all of what's important of the music with mp3, although it sounds slightly worse. Of course I know how mp3 works - parts of the signal which the human ear can't hear are left out. The result varies from signal to signal - some songs may sound really ok, others may sound harsh or "bland". But the higher the bitrate, the less are those effects on the signal, and in my humble opinion at 192kbps it's barely audible in a mobile situation (bus, train, cycling, jogging).
That's my opinion, and it's different from yours. Nothing wrong with that!
|
|
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: January 23 2006 at 13:30 |
|
We agree actually, except on the "slightly worse".
|
|
Lindsay Lohan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 25 2005
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 3254
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 05:52 |
it amazes me that anybody that are used to be listening to cd's and then turns to mp3's are not annoyed by the tremendous loss of quality?
Its like being used to driving a ferrari and then start to drive a fiat instead...
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Recommended "MP3" player for prog use?
