[SergeSE]

I do not get how you get results where the fidelity figure for playing music or white noise is so much worse than for all the other test tone types. I suspect you have got an alignment problem with these types of signals. E.g. mild changes in phase response over frequency could yield very low correlation between white noise input and output but be very much inaudible as a form of distortion.

You are almost right, the reason of higher difference between input and output for white noise is phase response over frequency. Time alignment is perfect for all signals. That is why white noise is not appropriate test signal for assessment of perceived audio quality but it is the best signal to reveal phase response inaccuracy of an audio tract. Df values with real-world audio material correlates much better to perceived quality. It is true even in cases of testing psychoacoustic encoders (http://soundexpert.org/news/-/blogs/objective-difference-measurements-to-predict-listening-test-results-). For analog audio circuits the most promising technical signal is Program Simulation Noise. Its Df values are close to df values of real music material.

 

[RRod]

 
... and not only think but work on this. I'm pretty sure, there is an audio metric that correlates much much better to perceived audio quality. Results of applying such metrics to portable players are promising - http://soundexpert.org/portable-players

 
I was thinking more blind testing than measurement. Many audiophiles are aggressively anti-blind-testing, as though not knowing which device is which is some horrible torture reserved for a circle of hell. Given this, it's completely unsurprising to me that prices are on the loony side. Either way, both blind testing and measurement have their typical "worries" that people use against them e.g. "maybe there's something we're not measuring" or "maybe the blind test makes things too stressful".

 

[reginalb]

   
I was thinking more blind testing than measurement. Many audiophiles are aggressively anti-blind-testing, as though not knowing which device is which is some horrible torture reserved for a circle of hell. Given this, it's completely unsurprising to me that prices are on the loony side. Either way, both blind testing and measurement have their typical "worries" that people use against them e.g. "maybe there's something we're not measuring" or "maybe the blind test makes things too stressful".

 
And of course the solution to a couple reasonably possible, but minor issues, is to switch to a completely awful paradigm of sighted testing. 

 

[SergeSE]

   
I was thinking more blind testing than measurement. Many audiophiles are aggressively anti-blind-testing, as though not knowing which device is which is some horrible torture reserved for a circle of hell. Given this, it's completely unsurprising to me that prices are on the loony side. Either way, both blind testing and measurement have their typical "worries" that people use against them e.g. "maybe there's something we're not measuring" or "maybe the blind test makes things too stressful".

 
 

   
And of course the solution to a couple reasonably possible, but minor issues, is to switch to a completely awful paradigm of sighted testing. 

 
No one pretends that blind testing is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that blind testing is the worst form of audio quality assessment except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

 

[castleofargh]

 

   
I was thinking more blind testing than measurement. Many audiophiles are aggressively anti-blind-testing, as though not knowing which device is which is some horrible torture reserved for a circle of hell. Given this, it's completely unsurprising to me that prices are on the loony side. Either way, both blind testing and measurement have their typical "worries" that people use against them e.g. "maybe there's something we're not measuring" or "maybe the blind test makes things too stressful".

 
And of course the solution to a couple reasonably possible, but minor issues, is to switch to a completely awful paradigm of sighted testing. 

IMO the appeal doesn't come from confidence in the result, but from the fact that my sighted evaluation will always agree with me. that is a powerful argument to anybody who doesn't want anybody or anything telling him when he's wrong.
 
if a tree falls in the forest and I don't know I'm wrong, did it really fall?

 

[StanD]

 
IMO the appeal doesn't come from confidence in the result, but from the fact that my sighted evaluation will always agree with me. that is a powerful argument to anybody who doesn't want anybody or anything telling him when he's wrong.
 
if a tree falls in the forest and I don't know I'm wrong, did it really fall?

Hevea brasiliensis, it bounced back.

 

[RRod]

 
IMO the appeal doesn't come from confidence in the result, but from the fact that my sighted evaluation will always agree with me. that is a powerful argument to anybody who doesn't want anybody or anything telling him when he's wrong.
 
if a tree falls in the forest and I don't know I'm wrong, did it really fall?

 
Yeah but in a world where everything agrees with me, then I will always spend just that bit more $$, and then we end up in exactly the situation the post-in-question was addressing. So my feeling is that if people want the prices to be not so insane as to drive people away, you need to full-throatedly, from-the-mountaintop shout "sighted testing doesn't cut it!"

 

[reginalb]

  If anyone is curious to see their own ears' frequency response, there is an online test available that creates equal loudness contours.  
 
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html

 
I've been reading through this thread, I had made a post on here a while ago about my head sometimes hurting with certain DAC/amps when paired with my AKG Q701's Well I just tried out the test at that link, while didn't follow their instructions entirely, I used open back (grado's) headphoens and didn't ensure low background noise, just doing a quick test for fun, but I think I've identified my issue. That 16k signal, even at a relatively low volume for what I could hear, made my head really hurt, to the point that my eyes are watering. So I guess my brain dislikes high pitched sounds. Perhaps I need to be trying out some DAP's with treble rolloff! (or just, you know, use the EQ on the ones that I have)

 

[Ruben123]

I've been reading through this thread, I had made a post on here a while ago about my head sometimes hurting with certain DAC/amps when paired with my AKG Q701's Well I just tried out the test at that link, while didn't follow their instructions entirely, I used open back (grado's) headphoens and didn't ensure low background noise, just doing a quick test for fun, but I think I've identified my issue. That 16k signal, even at a relatively low volume for what I could hear, made my head really hurt, to the point that my eyes are watering. So I guess my brain dislikes high pitched sounds. Perhaps I need to be trying out some DAP's with treble rolloff! (or just, you know, use the EQ on the ones that I have)

What about a headphone with milder treble.

 

[reginalb]

What about a headphone with milder treble.

 
I will give that a try, along with a little bit better DAC/amp, who knows if there the inbuilt sound card in my HP laptop wasn't adding some weird noise to the signal.
 
In unrelated news, I received an ad via email today, from Moon-Audio, advertising a product on a steep discount, from $5,000 to $3,000:
 
https://www.moon-audio.com/ps-audio-perfectwave-power-plant-10.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=PS%20Audio%20P10&utm_campaign=June%2023%202016
 
How can they get away with calling this a power generator? From the Moon-Audio description: 
 
"The P10 PerfectWave Power Plant is the largest and most advanced high-end personal power generating station in the world.  It's capable of powering any size system with pure sine wave power, no other product comes close to a P10′s ability to bring forth all that’s possible from your system and ensures you get the same great performance every time."
 
Hmm, this is a personal power generating station? Now, sure, power generation is a bit of a misnomer, since a power plant really just converts energy from some form to the AC that arrives in your home. But I always interpreted a power generator to be something that's converting a more raw form of something with high potential energy in to power that we can use. Clearly, this isn't like a gas generator, though that would be awesome. The Moon-Audio listing wasn't clear, so I headed to the producer's site, and got this:
 
"The PerfectWave P10 Power Plant takes your incoming AC power and converts it to DC, similar to what comes out of a battery, and then with patented PS Audio technology regenerates and produces new sine-wave-perfect, regulated high current AC power..."
 
What the actual ****. So, it converts your AC to DC, then back to AC? I mean, I know audiophiles will buy some crazy stuff, but seriously?
 
So I wanted to get to the definition of generator, was I correct?
 
"...A machine that converts one form of energy into another, especially mechanical energy into electrical energy, as a dynamo, or electrical energy into sound, as an acoustic generator."
 
OK, well, technically you could call it a generator, but a useless one. You end up with the same output type as the input (Though undoubtedly there is energy lost in the process). So I guess you can't get on them too much about their wording, as it's technically correct, but I think it's pretty misleading to call it a generator. Anyway, that was my morning laugh before work today. Now I'm past start time for work, so I guess I should get to it!

 

[Ruben123]

I think it is sort of a UPS -a device with built in battery than constantly charges and outputs HiFi quality angel's pee power for your incredible ak380cu stock.
Like a notebook. It can (can!!!! ) in very bad wired houses help get rid of interference. But if you have the money for such a device, you too have the money to move to a great new house with swimming pool, house maids etc lol

 

[Dillan]

God I should have sub'd here a while a go. As a technology professional/entrepreneur I tend to look at things from a more technical and science driven perspective. I also am a big believer in double blind testing and just thorough examination and testing in general. A lot of times people will say this or that is better while using different tracks, different times of comparison and just using crazy outlandish reasons. I don't really care either way, people can waste their money and time all they want - but I at least try to question and inform people as much as possible.

 

[jcx]

hope it works for you but Sound Science struggles with relevance at head-fi
 
the format isn't great and the general forum denizens that have been "protected" from fact based arguments seem to want to come here to provoke and then get offended easily

 

[Dillan]

hope it works for you but Sound Science struggles with relevance at head-fi

the format isn't great and the general forum denizens that have been "protected" from fact based arguments seem to want to come here to provoke and then get offended easily

Sad really

 

[castleofargh]

"The study, published in the journal's June issue, found that 60 percent of people lied at least once during a 10-minute conversation and told an average of two to three lies. "
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-06/uoma-urf061002.php
 
 
+
 
normal average ignorance
 
 
+
 
 
people who believe that if it's them talking, then opinion is fact. who will get highly offended when you ask for some evidence of their exotic claims.
 
=
 
much wow, very fighting.

 
 
 
 
of course none of this would happen if people had more curiosity than ego. (not me, I'm perfect!)