New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by UltMusicSnob

The graph above cuts off before the last big chord, so it's missing some of the high-frequency energy from strings struck hard.
This is Voxengo's static plot of the few quiet seconds at the end, derived from the difference file after it has been boosted (so never mind the scale at the right, it overstates the difference).   The main thing I was wondering about for this analysis was the mids, and it looks like that is where this tool plots the great signal strength of the difference file. This is only for the passage ~27 to 29 seconds near the end.
Is there some function of the jittering algorithms in the software used that could be providing other artifacts? Another possibility (I think): Is there some interaction of the jittered file with my particular system which could somehow be highlighting or amplifying the jitter artifacts of the file? foobar of course, followed by RME Babyface, followed by Schiit Asgard 2 into Beyerdynamic 770 Pros.
Replication.   foo_abx 1.3.4 report foobar2000 v1.2.8 2013/09/27 16:48:19 File A: C:\Users\jhughes1\Downloads\path30n.flac File B: C:\Users\jhughes1\Downloads\path30jr.flac 16:48:19 : Test started. 16:48:45 : 01/01  50.0% 16:48:53 : 02/02  25.0% 16:49:06 : 03/03  12.5% 16:49:49 : 04/04  6.3% 16:50:17 : 05/05  3.1% 16:50:34 : 05/06  10.9% 16:51:03 : 06/07  6.3% 16:52:00 : 07/08  3.5% 16:52:25 : 08/09  2.0% 16:53:09 : 09/10  1.1% 16:53:20 : Test...
Yes, these are normal listening levels, it interferes with identification if I crank levels. The cue is the moment of attack, as the hammers strike the strings on quiet chord. The loud chord at the beginning is too complex, at least with what I'm able to do so far. I'm still cuing on "focus", which is a poorly defined descriptor. The jittered chord also sounds different in a way I might call frequency balance--it becomes *slightly* less realistic than the 'n' version, out...
Okay, I'm going to just leave Crane Song alone for now, until I understand what's up with their files.   In the meantime, path30n versus the latest, path30jr:   foo_abx 1.3.4 report foobar2000 v1.2.8 2013/09/26 20:14:38 File A: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel Listening Tests\path30n.flac File B: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel Listening Tests\path30jr.flac 20:14:38 : Test started. 20:15:05 : 01/01  50.0% 20:15:10 : 02/02  25.0% 20:15:15 : 02/03 ...
Very quick and dirty test, cheap earphones, from the Crane Song website, this is the reference file B versus the A version. foo_abx 1.3.4 reportfoobar2000 v1.2.82013/09/26 13:52:13File A: C:\Users\jhughes1\Downloads\Crane_B.wavFile B: C:\Users\jhughes1\Downloads\Crane_A.wav13:52:13 : Test started.13:52:51 : 00/01  100.0%13:53:31 : 01/02  75.0%13:53:44 : 02/03  50.0%13:54:15 : 03/04  31.3%13:54:26 : 03/05  50.0%13:54:31 : 04/06  34.4%13:54:42 : 04/07  50.0%13:54:48 : 05/08 ...
 i dont know if this is true or not, you are saying someone whos not into audio when listening to music dont pay as much attention to whats going on? or is it simply that they cant tell the difference between how something sounds on one system compares to another? No, I'm saying something more specific. I'm saying someone who's not into audio when listening to music doesn't pay as much attention to how the music sounds in terms of what audiophiles listen for: soundstage,...
This note is just to check that I haven't missed a follow-up file or recommendation. I think it would be useful to nail down how a real 2-3ns jittered file compares to a non-jittered one. I think I do need to leave it to the experts what sort of reference file to use. Something really recent, that we [somehow?] know had a very accurate clock at ADC?
New Posts  All Forums: