Comments on: Bits are bits… or are they?

By: Oliver Masciarotte

Oliver Masciarotte — Wed, 13 May 2015 04:23:28 +0000

Hi folks,
Re-reading this discourse after some passage of time has brought not a new perspective but a renewed sense that our ear-brain mechanism is more complex that some of you folks seem to assume…
I wrote a piece for another editor friend of mine, over at audioXpress, that you may find thought provoking or will simply dismiss as more touchy-feely nonsense. Take a look:

http://audioxpress.com/article/The-High-Resolution-Audibility-Test.html

Thanks for listening,
OMas

By: Bedo

Bedo — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:31:40 +0000

We need a lot more ingsthis like this!

By: Oliver Masciarotte

Oliver Masciarotte — Fri, 02 May 2014 14:08:05 +0000

Hi Mr. Loomis,

I will say that my findings are incomplete, more work is needed. Now that I own sufficient test examples, I will be arranging some double blind testing. I am working to borrow a protocol analyzer or ’scope that can help to track down the cause of what we heard. In the meantime, I have opinions, as do you, that are not verified by double blind tests.

I will also say that one should not lump all listeners together in one, clueless mass. Some audio engineers are trained listeners, having to make very subtle quality judgements every day. Mastering engineers come to mind as an example. Same goes for sommeliers; they rely heavily on their senses. These folks are rigorous yet also rely on their subjective judgement, without which they could not do their job or create products that we all either love or hate.

OMas

By: David Loomes

David Loomes — Fri, 02 May 2014 00:39:24 +0000

Agree with Dik, double blind testing is the elephant in the room.
I have known since around 1980 when 7 out of 8 “golden ears”
(respected hifi journalists) were unable to pick out the “superior”
Linn Sondek to it’s rivals (guessed wrong) in a double blind test.
Ever since DBT’s have been trashed by the hifi press (wonder why). Without DBT the psychological components of the human brain are able to run rampant. The problem then is our egos overide any objectiveness(it’s way more expensive it has to be better is one). The brain will fool you every time. Don’t believe me, try this: after several months of using your expensive new component, put back the old component (change nothing else) & see who is kidding who. After countless (long term) experiments this is what I have found.
1) In a digitally sourced system the biggest influence on sound is
the chip. Delta Sigma chips are sonically inferior to the earlier R2R
ladder chips. Audiophiles were given the shaft way back then as the criteria for the new chips were: less costly, easier to implement, end of story.
My Magnavox (I hear the chortles) CD player with TDA 1541 chip outperforms any SD based system I have tried (way more expensive), by a country mile.
Can anyone tell me why it is so many of the top of the line DAC’s
use R2R chips that have been out of production for close to 25 years?
2) discussions about cables are really side issues compared to the
fundamental issue of sonic inferiority (read digititus) since the introduction of SD chips.
Try this, buy a $100 CD player off ebay with a 1541 chip (or similarily respected R2R chip & do a double blind test with your current set up & publish the results.

By: Dik Hedlund

Dik Hedlund — Thu, 01 May 2014 17:08:04 +0000

No double-blind testing — results are inaccurate.

By: earwaxxer

earwaxxer — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 22:39:45 +0000

Interesting comparison to add to others that have been done – It seems pretty well a given at this stage of the game that USB cables do, in fact, sound different. It has been some years since Wavelength Audio’s asynchronous protocol emerged, and started the buzz about the different sound of various cable. I currently run a USB adapter from my laptop to the DAC. Both lay on the floor. That sounds the best from my experience. No ‘cable’ at all. Im sure YMMV…

By: John Reekie

John Reekie — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:04:15 +0000

“Is it a total exaggeration to suggest that the livelihoods of certain types of engineers are at stake, or that the future of the audio industry itself will be determined by what is said in articles like this one?” Yes – I’d say that would be more than a little far-fetched.

By: Montracon Tautliner

Montracon Tautliner — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 20:04:23 +0000

P.S. Please feel free to remove my posts – I hate to think I might have upset anyone.

By: Montracon Tautliner

Montracon Tautliner — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 18:44:16 +0000

Sorry…. I know it seems churlish to have posted what might be construed as negative comments. I apologise. But simultaneously the comments are also positive in the sense that they support my fellow engineers who, in the audio world at least, are somewhat under siege these days! Our job is to solve problems and the only tools we have are science, reason and logic. We are put in a very awkward position when the received wisdom says that, in fact, there are clearly-audible imperfections that we literally cannot explain, never mind cure. Is it a total exaggeration to suggest that the livelihoods of certain types of engineers are at stake, or that the future of the audio industry itself will be determined by what is said in articles like this one?

I’ll leave it there!

By: John Reekie

John Reekie — Wed, 09 Apr 2014 12:05:46 +0000

MT, I’m going to interject and suggest that perhaps you might take a step back and consider what it is that you are doing here. There is no war here, never mind a battle, to win. If you would like to step up to the plate and demonstrate the courage to actually write and publish an article on this matter, please use the contact form. Thank you.