[zazex]

I've done blind tests, 320mp3 side by side with CD is noticeable, but by its self it's perfectly fine.

I have tried 24/192 with Dr Chesky's and while good, CD is the sweet spot.

 
 

 
You must have very good ears! I once blind test with some friends in the college day between a Sony CDP-101 and a cassette tape recorded out of it on a Luxman deck (which happened to have zero hiss). Not a single one of us can consistently id which was which!
 
I also compared the HD "Jazz at the Pawnshop" tracks with a 128mp3 rip from a CD and the mp3 actually sound better, it must be a difference master!

It's not only a matter of having "good ears".
It's also a matter of practiced listening.
 
Double blind tests can be helpful but,
in the end, are of limited utility in these matters.,
 
Consider the bias...much double blind testing
or "challenges" involve a person or group which
wants to discredit audiophiles and their gear.
 
Also consider alternatives to double blind testing,
such as the system designed by Swedish Radio
(analagous to the BBC) called double-blind, triple-stimulus,
hidden-reference. A subject (listener) would hear three objects
(musical presentations); presentation A was always the unprocessed signal,
with the listener required to identify if presentation B or C had been processed through the codec.

 

[Sonic Defender]

   
 

It's not only a matter of having "good ears".
It's also a matter of practiced listening.
 
Double blind tests can be helpful but,
in the end, are of limited utility in these matters.,
 
Consider the bias...much double blind testing
or "challenges" involve a person or group which
wants to discredit audiophiles and their gear.
 
Also consider alternatives to double blind testing,
such as the system designed by Swedish Radio
(analagous to the BBC) called double-blind, triple-stimulus,
hidden-reference. A subject (listener) would hear three objects
(musical presentations); presentation A was always the unprocessed signal,
with the listener required to identify if presentation B or C had been processed through the codec.

That isn't completely correct, why is there a bias against audiophiles? That is like saying medical research wants the drugs being tested to fail. Frankly double blind testing is the best way to eliminate bias and it is the gold standard in all research where bias can be a confound. That Swedish initiative would produce possible confounds as it is already telling the listener that one of the two signals is processed increasing the ability to guess correctly by one third. I am an audiophile, and I care about all aspects of the hobby and I don't think everyone needs to live by the science of evidence. If you enjoy something and that is good enough for you then fantastic. However, when people ask legitimate questions such as can people reliably hear and identify claimed differences between various levels of compression or between 16 bit and higher, those questions deserve to be explored and if we like it or not, the only way to test subjective experience with any hope of getting somewhat valid results is to attempt to eliminate chance from the results as well as expectation bias, hence multiple trials, and blind listening tests.
 
Even these results can't be viewed as perfect, but they are the best compromise between subjective and objective experience. I personally would hope that high resolution files sounded better as I would gladly pay more to replace some of my collection. Anyway, your points are well taken, and I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, being that double blind testing is not perfect (but it is darn good and thankfully the vast majority of research uses blind testing). Cheers.

 

[SptTablo]

 
Yes, blind testing is the gold standard and the more you test assumptions, the more money you may save. Even when people tell you they can hear the difference you need to be skeptical as these tests are often not blind testing so bias may be at play, plus we need to know how many trials were done. It is important to do enough trials, I would say about 15 in order to establish reliability. There is always chance that can explain any results so the more trials you do, the less likely chance can explain the results. There is plenty of opinions on both sides, but as far as I can tell, the camp that says above 16bits is wasted has made the best case, and when I test blind up to this point I can't hear a difference. And as I said, volume match as I think one way they make high resolution files sound better is that they are mastered just a little bit louder. I won't pretend what I am saying is fact, simply that it is well worth your time to see about testing. I even find a 320mp3 can sound amazing.

Thanks for your thoughtful input. 
I really appreciate it

 

[Sonic Defender]

  Thanks for your thoughtful input. 
I really appreciate it

No worries, and if you do end up doing some testing let us know how it played out. Cheers.

 

[jude]

  No worries, and if you do end up doing some testing let us know how it played out...

 
...by posting your results here.
 
Let's get this thread back on topic, guys.

 

[SptTablo]

   
...by posting your results here.
 
Let's get this thread back on topic, guys.

Sorry Jude.
 
I just wanted to enjoy my Z7 with better audio files

 

[Sonic Defender]

  Sorry Jude.
 
I just wanted to enjoy my Z7 with better audio files

You don't need to be sorry, the diversion was relatively small and such diversions are so common in threads all over head-fi they are essentially assumed to happen. What is important is to not stay off topic for too long. A great deal of important learning for many comes out of such OT segments in threads. But yes, in general trying to stay OT is best (but so darn hard). I understand why Jude and the admins need to nip these conversations in the bud as they can get long and divisive. I'll try to behave better as well!
 
By the way, the link to the sound science forum is very useful. I try to remember to pop in there from time to time as there are some interesting discussions and very knowledgeable members who frequent there. Thanks for the reminder Jude! 

 

[Mink]

I think the Z7s are the most 'analogue' sounding headphones I ever owned and auditioned. They have the warmth and thickness of my old hifi set (crappy tapedeck), but enriched with clarity, detail and definition.
And all this sweet sensation with only digital compressed MP3's as format 

 It shows source material is less important than transducers like speakers and headphones.

 

[wahsmoh]

  If I really try hard I can hear a very, very, very, slight difference between a 256kb AAC music file and a losseless format. In order to notice this futile difference I have to listen with an extreme fixed concentration for a long time, tediously switching between both formats. No fun. The AAC file obviously isn't tonally less satisfactory, I don't miss any musical pleasure with it, so I use this format and bitrate as the standard for importing CD's on my disk drive. The last couple of years I almost exclusively listen music via my iMac.

I agree with you Mink. This is my conclusion I came to. I think 256kbps AAC sounds better than 256kbps .mp3, with 320kbps being just about = to 256kbps AAC. Anything less than 256kbps .mp3 and the lack of dynamic range becomes more noticeable, the first thing that goes is the high frequency sounds.
 
I have to spend a lot of time comparing a 320kbps to an FLAC just to hear slight differences, and sometimes I can't even tell because the masters are also different. The superlatives though outweigh the fact that it is still lossy compressed .mp3 and lossless is better for archiving and sound quality when all is said and done. (if you have the space)
 
Anyways, back on topic. Now that the Z7 has been out for awhile, how have people felt they stacked up to other closed headphones in the same price range?? I have heard a few comparisons last year but nothing definitive enough for me to really understand the Z7 and why some people love it and some people don't. I still haven't had the opportunity to hear a pair which I am anxiously waiting for.

 

[Mink]

 
I agree with you Mink. This is my conclusion I came to. I think 256kbps AAC sounds better than 256kbps .mp3, with 320kbps being just about = to 256kbps AAC. Anything less than 256kbps .mp3 and the lack of dynamic range becomes more noticeable, the first thing that goes is the high frequency sounds.
 
I have to spend a lot of time comparing a 320kbps to an FLAC just to hear slight differences, and sometimes I can't even tell because the masters are also different. The superlatives though outweigh the fact that it is still lossy compressed .mp3 and lossless is better for archiving and sound quality when all is said and done. (if you have the space)
 
Anyways, back on topic. Now that the Z7 has been out for awhile, how have people felt they stacked up to other closed headphones in the same price range?? I have heard a few comparisons last year but nothing definitive enough for me to really understand the Z7 and why some people love it and some people don't. I still haven't had the opportunity to hear a pair which I am anxiously waiting for.

I can only compare them to yesteryears headphones in the same price range, the Denon D5000s: the Sony's are no better nor worse, just different.
And just like I felt the D5000s were overpriced at their retailprice back then ($699) I feel the same way about the Sony's now.
But they are excellent nonetheless

 

[Sonic Defender]

I regret passing on the Z7 at $500 Canadian recently. I'll hope to find a set soon as they sound like what I want to augment my 560s.

 

[SptTablo]

I regret passing on the Z7 at $500 Canadian recently. I'll hope to find a set soon as they sound like what I want to augment my 560s.

What makes you to regret?

 

[Sonic Defender]

What makes you to regret?

Because I didn't buy it when I think I should have. I bought another headphone that cost me more money that I don't think suits my taste as much as the Z7 would have.

 

[SptTablo]

  Because I didn't buy it when I think I should have. I bought another headphone that cost me more money that I don't think suits my taste as much as the Z7 would have.

Ohhh I mis-interpreted your words..
 
For me, I could audition them prior to my decision on purchasing Z7 so I was quite happy mine sounds better than the demo unit. (Placebo effect I think though..)
 
Now I am looking to get IEMs since I am not willing to wear these outside in the summer.... 

 

[dweaver]

Ohhh I mis-interpreted your words..

For me, I could audition them prior to my decision on purchasing Z7 so I was quite happy mine sounds better than the demo unit. (Placebo effect I think though..)

Now I am looking to get IEMs since I am not willing to wear these outside in the summer.... 

Z5... Matching set made in heaven...