[xnor]

Quote:

There has been many times over the years where I've been adjusting an EQ, and thought I heard differences, only to find out it was bypassed the whole time.

The same happened to me in the past. It's an eye-opening experience, just like this experiment.
The decoded files are identical. Remember, flac supports different levels of compression so the encoded (.flac) files can be different in size.

 

[dharma]

we are artists in our mind - smaller or bigger differencies in physical level (differently shaped ears, inner ear, nervous system, left-right brain hemispheres) and not only person to person, but also 'day by day'...
And, are we concentrating on sound what we are listening or we relax in sound experience, are we in nondualistic listening experience ('just sound') or are we listening with thoughts/comments, are we physically active during listening (tapping leg or hands, eyes seeing something or not, etc.) or are we physically calm and completely relaxed...
 And, selective hearing/listening is well known in psychoacoustics (mind is jumping from one detail to another or is acting like lightning specialist with powerful spotlight, lightning/showing selective things from wholeness - this is also called as 'projective thinking') - yes, we are somekind 'artists', all the time (everything is changing all the time, do we want or recognize it or not). Or we can say other way, that we are 'interpreting' things we hear (or in worsest case, we are literally 'translating' things we hear).

 

[Crazy*Carl]

Quote:

Without comparing the files technically, I just did another listening test, and still hear a small difference. The simplest way to describe it is that file "B" sounds a bit thinner and brighter.
 
After the listening test I then compared the files technically. The first thing I noticed was that the total file size is different for each audio file. Sample "A" is 7.1mb and sample "B" is 6.7mb. How can the total files sizes be different if the files are claimed to be the same? Clearly the files have been processed in different ways. If they have been processed in different ways, then it's certainly plausible that we can hear an audible difference, right? The bottom line is if you take away .4 mb of information from a 1 minute audio file something has to change.
 
What am I missing guys?

I took the original flac file and cut out the 1 minute segment with audacity and exported it to a wav.  Then I recoded the wav into flac files using different flac compression levels.  This results in slightly different size, both being lossless copies.

 

[Crazy*Carl]

My whole negative opinion and experience at head-fi has been based on double blind testing.  I had a HifiMan EF2, hot audio DAC, and a Audio gd Fun.  I double blind tested them all, and I was never able to tell a difference between those, an ipod, and my computer - they all sound awesome but equal with my HD580.  This made me totally skeptical of all of it because people rave about all of these audio devices on the forums.  On the other side, the suggestion to switch from the HD485 to the HD580 was totally different.  The change with those was massive and I appreciate this neutral clear sound now.  There is truth in all this!  But dedicated amps and dacs... I think technology has gotten good enough today to make these just for show and a $150 volume knob. (I know most will disagree, but I trust my blind tests above all else) 
 
I have been enjoying the same sound through my intel motherboard->HD580 for several months now.

 

[santacore]

CrazyCarl,
 
I'm glad your final goal is to enjoy the music, that we can both agree on. As for differences in equipment and audio files, to each his own. I've been a professional sound engineer since the late 90's, and trust my ears. It's taken me years of training in order for me to hear the subtle differences equipment, cables, and software make. If you don't hear them, no problem, save yourself some time and money. I have no desire to convince anyone that what I hear is what they should hear. I'll leave it at that, thanks for the entertaining exercise.

 

[dharma]

..."A lossless audio track is really only bit-for-bit identical to its source if it's been decoded and processed correctly. "... http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1233

 

[kingtz]

I find this test much harder. Overall, I don't think the recording quality is a good as Blind Test 1, the volume is also a bit lower, and then add in the fact that I don't like this song and I find it difficult to keep listening to the two versions repeatedly.
 
Oh yeah, forgot to mention: I think B is lossless. Slightly fuller vocals and the bass has more impact.

 

[silverxxx]

Hey nice test, i actually wanted to check the spectrums but i thought that would be cheating. I guess there's something to learn from this test. I sure won't trust subtle differences in the future without some sort of explanation. And that eq thing happens to me too. Oh, and yes, thanks for making me look like a fool.

 

[Cron]

--

 

[Crazy*Carl]

Quote:

CrazyCarl,
 
I'm glad your final goal is to enjoy the music, that we can both agree on. As for differences in equipment and audio files, to each his own. I've been a professional sound engineer since the late 90's, and trust my ears. It's taken me years of training in order for me to hear the subtle differences equipment, cables, and software make. If you don't hear them, no problem, save yourself some time and money. I have no desire to convince anyone that what I hear is what they should hear. I'll leave it at that, thanks for the entertaining exercise.

Wells cheers mate, but I dunno if you should trust your ears.  You seemed pretty confident that B was the higher quality file even though they were the same.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

 Oh, and yes, thanks for making me look like a fool.

That's not the best way to look at it. There is fantasy and imagination and reality, fantasy and imagination may be more entertaining sometimes but reality is healthier...even if sometimes sobering.

 

[revolink24]

Quote:

I find this test much harder. Overall, I don't think the recording quality is a good as Blind Test 1, the volume is also a bit lower, and then add in the fact that I don't like this song and I find it difficult to keep listening to the two versions repeatedly.
 
Oh yeah, forgot to mention: I think B is lossless. Slightly fuller vocals and the bass has more impact.

You should go back and read the thread now 

 

[Crazy*Carl]

LOL

 

 

[xnor]

I don't think crazy carl wanted to make anyone look like a fool, but instead demonstrate how easily we can fool ourselves or how easy it is to think to be able to hear a difference, while, in fact, there is none.

 

[dharma]

Actually, we hear differencies, because we are changing too all times... OK, if to go little away from this absolute postulate, its easy to understand that even minimal changes of our ear (inner or outer ear) is changing what we hear (some persons are more aware of those changes some are not). And its true too, that our tension in muscles connected to ear (or ear surroundings) is changing all the time, so actually we change ear (and ear channel) shape and position during listening, but sure it doesn't mean that sample A or B are repeatedly same way different...