Blue or red pill?

[PeterSt]

18 minutes ago, semente said:

Peter, out of curiosity, what would it look like if you were playing live from storage without using a memory buffer at all?

 

Ricardo, "the same". Well sort of, and not really when the recordings are supposed to have captured the differences. But I don't know because I never compared like that. Well, unless it is some Foobar with XXHighEnd comparison but it is hard to judge the absolute merits of that (because XXHighEnd vs XXHighEnd surely differs per "setting"). But mind you, this requires analysis software to find it in the first place; looking at 176400 samples per second and finding the real differences (because with the Motu too there's noise which makes it (normaly !) different ... is a huge pain (if doable at all). Anyway I never attempted it like that, although the both files are on my screen all right ...

[PeterSt]

FWIW, this is a relatively large difference in the right channel for "offset" :

 

 

Thus, see how the (bottom) one arrives earlier at 0V (coming from negative) than the other. Notice that in the end this is just low frequency. So if this is anything for real, the low(er) frequency is not equal in both.

[PeterSt]

6 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Thus, see how the (bottom) one arrives earlier at 0V (coming from negative)

 

Apologies. Not arriving earlier at 0V but at the +0.4 )%) line (the straight gray line).

[manisandher]

L-R channels corrected.

 

-18dB (just as in ABX):

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lbsPCsZ9-nGTbd_UP2z1kjYB_XZvnF0M

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1NpyUvJQoSqKEqo6U8digb-5PDMVDJRSn

 

-0dB (warning - these are much louder than the earlier captures):

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FBu9VKnIA78kAm4NKXaQzrNalqWiii9E

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JxN1w11i4SxTBPGs-VGxgGapPVnS3Svz

 

Mani.

[Ralf11]

If you were to do another session, what would you change?

 

Use the Phasure DAC?

 

 

[fas42]

Another quick look, at the spectrums - different from the Tascam, at the HF end; gains 3dB at 20kHz! Starts to differ from the digital at about 7kHz, and actually drops a dB or two around 10kHz. IOW, the shape of the HF content difference is almost the inverse of the Tascam capture; suggesting, if nothing else has changed, that the ADC is the main "culprit".

[jabbr]

20 hours ago, sandyk said:

 I shouldn't need to keep repeating the same old stuff about confirmation via DBTs etc. and the fact that quite a few other  members report similar about .flac vs. .wav files. I have more trust in reports from highly respected Recording and Mastering Engineers who say similar , than from someone who hasn't even been able to compare the microphone feeds with the actual recorded results.

Neither do I have any idea of just how revealing your system is, other than  you keep insisting that

your method has overcome all the problems that others report having.

 That comes across as a wee bit arrogant without confirmation by others.

What reference do you have to make this claim ? Do you have access to any Master Recordings for comparison  purposes ?

Huh? 

 

Dude are you coming from a different planet? All I’m saying is that I don’t hear what you claim. What you claim is not generally accepted BTW in case you are unable to read — nor is what you claim accepted by our understanding of engineering and science...

 

Dude it’s you that needs to explain and prove not me ... my system not revealing 

 

Who the f*** are you? 

 

Seriously I doesn’t matter which DAC I use but I’ve got Equitech balanced into Phasure  G3 and into Pass/First Watt J2 acking as a headphone amp for HD800 or AKG 712 etc etc etc ... and LPS / batteries on everything and vibration isolation etc

 

So shove your “not revealing enough” sh**

[sandyk]

29 minutes ago, jabbr said:

So shove your “not revealing enough” sh**

 

Charming !

 

BTW,  I didn't start this nasty exchange. You are virtually accusing  me of being full of crap or lying, simply because you are unable to hear the differences that I report hearing . How did you expect me to react ?
Unfortunately, we are living in different continents, or I could directly demonstrate what I have been reporting, just as I did for a Sydney E.E. with wide industry experience,(Cochlear, DEQX etc.) and you wouldn't need your " Gold standard" DBTs, or to use ABX to hear the differences for yourself either ! 

 

[jabbr]

37 minutes ago, sandyk said:

You are virtually accusing  me of being full of crap or lying, simply because you are unable to hear the differences that I report hearing

No I am actually stating that you are full of crap because you claim that my system is not revealing enough. I have no idea what weird idiosyncrasies your system has but my system to my ear does not demonstrate what you claim. Accept that. 

 

Im not telling you what you hear but I’m telling you what I hear. Accept that.

[sandyk]

34 minutes ago, jabbr said:

No I am actually stating that you are full of crap because you claim that my system is not revealing enough. I have no idea what weird idiosyncrasies your system has but my system to my ear does not demonstrate what you claim. Accept that. 

 

I did NOT claim that your system is not revealing enough. I simply stated that I had no idea how revealing your system is.

I am well aware from previous communications that in some cases you use quite similar measures to those I use.

 

Quote

Neither do I have any idea of just how revealing your system is, other than  you keep insisting that

your method has overcome all the problems that others report having....

 

I  accept that you are unable to hear the differences that Mani and Peter have reported hearing too.

In Peter's case , he first reported hearing differences between .wav files with identical checksums around 9 years and 8 months ago. That thread, " File-Format" is no longer readily accessible, but the attached is from a reply by Peter on 01-13-2012

" .....Somehow I always used his files to setup the analysis tool, and check for already known differences like I explained one in my previous post. Took me 4 months IIRC. Always his files, but just because I prepared to hold them against eachother. Prepared ...

 When all was finished I could have a go with it, and up to then (that 4 month time span) I honestly never listened for comparison. This is A-B stuff which I don't like, so I really really must sit down for that, and have some hours spare which I usually don't have.
 Then came this day a friend was over, and I thought to do this together. So we did, and we both found the same differences for the bit-matching files. We both heard it for the first time, and there was no doubt. The differences were there, but they could not be ... Too much IT experience here ......

[Ralf11]

how revealing does the system need to be anyway?

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

how revealing does the system need to be anyway?

 

That depends entirely on the magnitude of the reported differences.

 The files that Mani has posted weren't specifically created to highlight differences.

Mani simply reported that he was able to hear differences between 2 settings in XXHE player.

I have no doubts that Peter could also create more obvious sounding differences if he set out to.

[Ralf11]

Is my system revealing enough?

 

(Maggie 3.7, Sunfire amp, ARC LS25 Mk II pre-amp, DacPlus DAC, Redbook CD or SACDs)

[PeterSt]

Hi Alex,

Can you now go elsewhere with this hobby horse. It isn't a hoot related.

Thanks,

Peter

[sandyk]

28 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Hi Alex,

Can you now go elsewhere with this hobby horse. It isn't a hoot related.

Thanks,

Peter

 

 That is up to Mani , not you !

 If Mani PMs me asking me to butt out, I will do so.

 

 It isn't the Peter and Mani thread, it's the Mansr and Mani thread !!!

Any assistance to Mani by you should be done via PMs.

You appear to have virtually relegated Mansr to the sidelines in this thread.

We need to get back to further collaboration between Mani and Mansr

 

 I posted these replies due to Jabbr having a go at me.

He obviously does not agree that what Mani is reporting here is possible, whether by Software in XXHE or Hardware means !

[buonassi]

after 106 pages, Chris should just give mani and mansr their own forum section.  

[manisandher]

14 minutes ago, sandyk said:

He obviously does not agree that what Mani is reporting here is possible, whether by Software in XXHE or Hardware means !

 

No Alex. @jabbr is saying that he can't hear differences between two bit-identical files played back in the same way.

 

This thread is all about the same file being played back in different bit-identical ways. It's all about the playback.

 

Lets stick to the latter.

 

Mani.

[manisandher]

18 hours ago, manisandher said:

...

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Y4TiJDFzh6YUNnB4GTnQk1vsqzKvMU9U

 

 

I linked two sets of A-B captures yesterday - one set -18dB attenuation (as used in the A/B/X), and one set at -0dB attenuation.

 

I can hear differences between A and B of each set, similar to those I heard in the ABX. The differences are not as pronounced as they were in the ABX, but I believe they're there... and audible.

 

Mani.

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, manisandher said:

 

No Alex. @jabbr is saying that he can't hear differences between two bit-identical files played back in the same way.

  

This is what everybody who has downloaded your files would be doing, and almost certainly from the same storage area.

 The vast majority would not be using XXHE for playback either.

1 minute ago, manisandher said:

I can hear differences between A and B of each set, similar to those I heard in the ABX. The differences are not as pronounced as they were in the ABX, but I believe they're there... and audible.

 

Mani.

 

 Are you able to hear differences between  both Analogue and Digital captures, and if so ,did you DL your own files to listen to them, or use local storage ?

[PeterSt]

Can someone close this thread now ?

[manisandher]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

  This is what everybody who has downloaded your files would be doing, and almost certainly from the same storage area.

 

No Alex. The analogue captures are not bit-identical. How could they be?

 

Mani.

[manisandher]

4 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Are you able to hear differences between  both Analogue and Digital captures, and if so ,did you DL your own files to listen to them, or use local storage ?

 

OK Alex. Please stop now.

 

Cheers,

Mani.

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, manisandher said:

 

No Alex. The analogue captures are not bit-identical. How could they be?

 

Mani.

 

 This question is relevant, whether you wish to believe it or not.

 Did you DL your own files to listen to them for the comparisons ?

 

 Please just humour me with a reply to this question and I will leave this thread.

 

[manisandher]

20 minutes ago, sandyk said:

This question is relevant, whether you wish to believe it or not.

 

It's not the topic of this thread.

 

20 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Did you DL your own files to listen to them for the comparisons ?

 

Please just humour me with a reply to this question and I will leave this thread.

 

Please start a new thread about this, and I'll happily post my answer there.

 

Mani.

[fas42]

Okay, now that Mani has confirmed he can hear something in these captures, I'll start looking again for anything can distinguish them.  First step, in comparing 9._A and 10._B, the spectra are perfect copies, visually, in Audacity for matching sections.