skamp said:

Do you consider making hollow claims all day long to be more rewarding than actually proving their claims?

This isn't an isolated case. Audiophiles almost never back-up their claims. Funny how both of them vanished as soon as I challenged them. They usually try to save face by mocking the challenge, the challenger or the methodology, and that's the end of that.

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

Well just as you don't take us seriously. We don't take you seriously either. 

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

 


Here's a few tests for you. I'd like to see you do as well .
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/633360/test-your-ability-to-hear-pitch
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/590632/poll-can-you-hear-sound-over-20khz/270

Click to expand...

miceblue said:

Pardon my ignorance, but how does one tell the difference between the iPod Video 5G and the iPod Video 5.5G?
 
In nearly every test I've done with my iPod Video 5_G, my songs sound richer and more lively than with the Clip Zip with a 32-ohm headphone. The soundstage is also larger both in terms of depth and width.
I've heard that the Clip+ sounds warm, but I personally don't hear it especially compared to the Video 5_G. I find it fairly neutral/slightly analytical but the soundstage is quite small; maybe it's just me, I dunno.
 
I'm going to post in the sound science forums about measurements and soundstage since that seems to be of interest here.
 
 
Back on topic, I have no idea how the Classic sounds next to the Clip+ unfortunately. I was considering getting the new Classic though because apparently you can install Rockbox on it even though it's not on Rockbox's official list. I'm having second thoughts though because I don't like the "click wheel" too much and prefer the "old-school" navigation with the Clip Zip's media buttons.

Click to expand...

saratoga said:

 
 
I take skamp seriously.  You should too.  You may not care for his attitude, but hes a very knowledgeable person and it makes no sense to dismiss someone's argument just because you dislike them personally.
 

 

 
Now those tests I would not take too seriously.  Its actually fairly hard to measure the limits of someone's hearing without a well controlled test.  I've used a well calibrated setup to measure my hearing, and I top out at 17.5k.  But if I take that test, it says I can hear 20k, which is simply wrong.

The reason for this is that to actually measure the limits of your hearing you have to very carefully control for distortion.  Even 0.1% distortion can easily turn a loud ultrasonic tone into an audible lower frequency tone.  Probably if you took a good mic and 96k A/D and recorded the output of that test, you'd see that the "22kHz" test tone you found you could hear contains a lot more lower frequency tones too.  

Click to expand...

miceblue said:

Pardon my ignorance, but how does one tell the difference between the iPod Video 5G and the iPod Video 5.5G?
 
 

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

Quote:

miceblue said:

Pardon my ignorance, but how does one tell the difference between the iPod Video 5G and the iPod Video 5.5G?
 
In nearly every test I've done with my iPod Video 5_G, my songs sound richer and more lively than with the Clip Zip with a 32-ohm headphone. The soundstage is also larger both in terms of depth and width.
I've heard that the Clip+ sounds warm, but I personally don't hear it especially compared to the Video 5_G. I find it fairly neutral/slightly analytical but the soundstage is quite small; maybe it's just me, I dunno.
 
I'm going to post in the sound science forums about measurements and soundstage since that seems to be of interest here.
 
 
Back on topic, I have no idea how the Classic sounds next to the Clip+ unfortunately. I was considering getting the new Classic though because apparently you can install Rockbox on it even though it's not on Rockbox's official list. I'm having second thoughts though because I don't like the "click wheel" too much and prefer the "old-school" navigation with the Clip Zip's media buttons.

Click to expand...

The 5.5G is most definitely warmer to my ears as well.  Plus its sound stage is quite vast for an ipod. The Fuze does sound more clinical in direct comparison. But comparing my Sansa Fuze directly to my iphone4 the Fuze is warmer sounding IMO.

Click to expand...

saratoga said:

I take skamp seriously.  You should too.  You may not care for his attitude, but hes a very knowledgeable person and it makes no sense to dismiss someone's argument just because you dislike them personally.

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

How would we know your setup is truly "well calibrated"? See my point? I could give a million and one excuses myself like yours. It goes nowhere.

Click to expand...

h20fidelity said:

That's the thing though, there's other ways to approach things, skampie babes take rudeness and blatant attitude to the extreme, why would we want to work with him and learn? If so, he has knowledge I don't want to learn from him because he is just so rude about it. Lee and I have spoken via PM about his challenge set infront of us, we both came to the conclusion we won't even try.. skamp should reconsider the way he approaches things. he needs to concentrate on other areas like social behaviour rather than measurements.

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

Plus even if we pass his test with flying colors we'll still be met with skepticism that there may have been error in the tests done lmao. Which further illustrates my point in my previous post. :rolleyes:

Click to expand...

saratoga said:

 
No I don't see your point.  Why do you need to know that my hearing test was well calibrated? Even if it wasn't, yours wasn't either, so your results are by definition no better then mine, and perhaps much worse.  At best, we're both wrong!  Which was my point, if you do a test like this in a web browser you shouldn't take the results too seriously.  

FWIW though, I calibrated using a good microphone in a sound dampened room.  I used a 1 MHz D/A to generate the test tone, and recorded on a 200kHz 24 bit A/D to verify that the test tone was > 100 dB above any distortion tones.  I used the high sampling frequencies to exclude any possible aliasing or passband effects in the DAQ.  Then I measured the outputs and checked that what I'd programmed was actually being produced via spectral domain methods.  I used both pure tones and sweeps, and both gave consistent results.  I don't see any obvious problems with this methodology, so I think its pretty good.   

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

Well why shouldn't I? 
 

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

You pretty much say these tests are not reliable?   How would I know yours are?
 
 

Click to expand...

lee730 said:

That is my point. We will never truly know. This **** never goes anywhere but down the toilet!
 
 

Click to expand...

goodvibes said:

Even FWs that measure identically flat sound different. Easily done with 2 clips *28 and *31 as well as Rockbox can easily be distinguished in an AB. I think the proper response is 'whatever' from here on out. Skamp is absolutely correct about output power and impedance. Not so much that the simplest measurements tell you everything.

Click to expand...