Testing audiophile claims and myths

[sander99]

A little help

Take the .wav files, create the mp3 files from them yourself, and to be absolutely sure that the .wav and .mp3 are not treated differently somehow somewhere in the playback system: convert the mp3 back to the same wav format as the original wav, level matched, and then compare the 2 wav versions in a blind abx test...

 

[bigshot]

He was caught cheating at ABX tests @ AVS about a decade ago.

He was a little bit too invested in his unique ability to hear the unhearable. When a person's ego is all wrapped up in proving something that's probably not true, I think it's a good idea if someone else administers the test to them. He was here talking about being able to hear the difference between SACD and CD noise floors or something unlikely like that, and he tried to offer me "proof" with ABX logs. He wanted me to automatically believe him just because he was presenting me with text files that said he could hear something. I asked him a simple question... "Did you loop small portions of the track and adjust the gain at all while you were taking the test?" he wiggled all around and wouldn't give a direct answer. I asked him clearly several times and never got an answer. He just got all huffy and tried to tell me that he had "highly trained ears" and knew better than the rest of us. Well, I have dumb old ordinary ears, and I can hear noise floors too if I jack the volume way up on the fade out of a song! I tend to prefer people who offer friendly suggestions over people who want to be king of the internet forum. He knew quite a bit and would have been interesting to talk with, but he didn't know his own limits. I think he created his own forum so he could pontificate and prevaricate without anyone questioning him. It's not a good idea to automatically take people on face value on the internet. Some people are who they are, but others create identities for themselves to feed their ego.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

His Foobar ABX logs were invaild when he did a 24/96 test at AVS which his meltdown got the thread locked. HA don't like him at all...

Invalid, how? The SHA1 signature check was invalid?

and he tried to offer me "proof" with ABX logs.

Did you do the signature test?

It's not a good idea to automatically take people on face value on the internet.

Most of your concerns remind me of your claims that you’ve tested everything you own, and everything’s transparent. I’d find it more plausible, if someone else tested you and included hidden references.

 

[Blackwoof]

Invalid, how? The SHA1 signature check was invalid?

He used a version of ABX plug in that didn't have that signature update. It was only useful for testing wither MP3 was okay at V2 or V0 for your DAP/Phone/PC, Not spamming them on a forum as hard facts.

 

[bigshot]

If he's monkeying with the test files, will a signature test show that? I think he goosed the fade outs and didn't think anyone would ask him if he had gain ridden the files. I wouldn't have put it past him to be running the output through waveform analysis as he took the test either. I'm not exactly sure what he did, but when I asked that question, he got *really* squirrelly. Something was rotten somewhere in Denmark. I think in his case, it's good to just require an independent person to administer the test. He has too many tricks up his sleeve to trust him at his word.

I've gotten good with sniffing out cheaters with my lossy test. I have a little trick that reveals them every time and they don't prepare for it because they just want to be right and don't think about what it means to be right.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

He used a version of ABX plug in that didn't have that signature update.

Aha! That doesn’t prove he cheated, but without the hashes... can’t validate either.

If he's monkeying with the test files, will a signature test show that?

Yes, if the hashes are there.

I'm not exactly sure what he did, but when I asked that question, he got *really* squirrelly. Something was rotten somewhere in Denmark. I think in his case, it's good to just require an independent person to administer the test.

You got really squirrelly when I asked about your tests. Have you considered an independent person who added hidden references?

 

[bigshot]

How about if he loops on a certain part of the track and adjusts the playback gain on his headphone amp? Or if he is running some sort of waveform analysis as he listens? I'm not familiar with ABX software...

I didn't bother to figure out exactly what he was doing and he certainly wasn't offering an explanation. But his reaction was way out of the norm for truthfulness. All my red flags were alerting.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

He used a version of ABX plug in that didn't have that signature update.

Was there evidence he cheated? Or simply a lack of evidence that he didn’t? Using an old version of Foobar ABX (was it before or after SHA1 was added?) is not proof of cheating. Intentionally using an obsolete version would Indeed be suspicious, but is there real evidence?

How about if he loops on a certain part of the track and adjusts the playback gain on his headphone amp? Or if he is running some sort of waveform analysis as he listens? I'm not familiar with ABX software...

I didn't bother to figure out exactly what he was doing and he certainly wasn't offering an explanation. But his reaction was way out of the norm for truthfulness. All my red flags were alerting.

Any evidence, besides a fully erect spidey sense?
FYI, I edited my last 2 posts... perhaps while you were typing,,,

 

[bigshot]

I don't have to eat a fish to know it's rotten. I can go by smell alone. I got to a point where I wasn't interested in engaging with him any more. I had no interest in going in for the kill.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

I don't have to eat a fish to know it's rotten. I can go by smell alone. I got to a point where I wasn't interested in engaging with him any more. I had no interest in going in for the kill.

We should all hope you find a way to get out of jury duty each time!!

 

[bigshot]

I'm a producer. Being able to discern when people are being disingenuous is an important part of the job!

 

[bfreedma]

That’s quite a serious charge. Do you have a link, or at least more info? How did he cheat? How was it discovered?

I’ll see if I can find it @AVS. May have been modded out.

One of Amir’s cheats that was uncovered was his adding a few seconds of silence to one of the two tracks he was ABXing. Pretty easy to differentiate tracks then...
there were also issues with consistency of the SHA hash that made results files questionable. These were discovered when the samples he was using were made available with the test results file on AVS.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

I’ll see if I can find it @AVS. May have been modded out.

That would be great! But with the tips you give below, I can search too.

One of Amir’s cheats that was uncovered was his adding a few seconds of silence to one of the two tracks he was ABXing. Pretty easy to differentiate tracks then...
there were also issues with consistency of the SHA hash that made results files questionable. These were discovered when the samples he was using were made available with the test results file on AVS.

THAT would be proof of cheating. If you or I (or anyone) find that, the matter would be settled.

 

[iFi audio]

In my case, I have an Ifi Pro iDSD which has solid state, tube and tube with correction for distortions, whatever it means.

Pro iDSD set in 'Tube+' mode reduces available negative feedback to a minimum. As a result, a greater amount of the tubes' natural harmonic distortion is produced.

If amp/preamp has tubes it doesn’t mean that whole signal is routed through them.

True. Pro iDSD's circuit set in the 'Solid-State" mode doesn't include them at all.

even if amp/preamp has tubes it doesn’t mean you get tube sound.

We'd have to first determine what tube sound is and isn't. Tubes can be warm, rich and mild as much as they can be fast, direct and open. It depends on a tube and what one does with it.

Adding a tube is more as a marketing thing in most cases

Whether one likes tubes or not is a subject for broad discussion, but I'd say that manufacturers into tubes know how to build circuits around them, which is more related to their knowledge on the subject and less so to marketing

I couldn’t hear any difference among the half dozen filters either, at which point I realized I threw money to the shitter, but that was before reading this forum.

On this forum you can also read that many people found differences in Pro iDSD's filters and analogue stages rather clear and substantial

This of course doesn't mean that you're in the wrong. If you don't hear any changes, you don't, which is fine, but at the same time this doesn't mean that there aren't any

If you still have the product, I'd suggest listening to it in one mode for extended time, say several days, and then switching to a different mode.

 

[bfreedma]

That would be great! But with the tips you give below, I can search too.
THAT would be proof of cheating. If you or I (or anyone) find that, the matter would be settled.

IIRC, the whole discussion of Amir’s testing was modded out of existence. I’ll check the Wayback Machine yo see if there’s an archived version of AVS that contains the posts. If you’ve been around a while, you’ll recognize the players. Arnie Krueger and Steve Eddy among others.

just to pile on, I’ll try to dig up a video of a session AP held a few years ago where they had to ask Amir to hold further comments/questions due to his consistent incorrect statements about the AP555. The eye rolling in the crowd is epic. For context, Amir has claimed on his site that Audio Precision engineers know less about their own analyzer than he does, and that they come to him for advice. AP publicly corrected that statement quickly.

In person, he isn’t a bad guy, but he has a case of chronic “Smartest Man In The Room” syndrome when discussing audio. The biggest issue I have with him in regards to his findings is that he doesn’t seem to address actual audibility when discussing differences in measurements. A lot of what he defines as “issues” are so far below audibility that they are meaningless.