Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: [TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD (Read 2337 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Quote from: kornchild2002 on
My uncles purchased the box set.  I compared the 24-bit FLAC files to my 16-bit ALAC files by completing a couple blind ABX tests with some tracks.  I could not determine a difference between the two.  I even compared Nero AAC lossy versions (encoded at -q0.5 with version 1.5.3.0) from the 44.1/16-bit masters to the 24-bit FLAC files.  I could not pass the ABX tests to save my life (either my my headphones or my semi-calibrated, about as good as it will ever get, home theater system).  The reviews on Amazon.com make for a humorous read though.  No point in arguing with people like that.  They are the same type of people who believe that $300 HDMI cables produce superior quality, a $1000 ethernet cable gives a superior advantage when streaming audio/video content, freezing CDs increase their sound quality, and that the Sun orbits the Earth.



What is your listening system consist of?  DAC, cables, and headphones, etc.?  Some equipment does a good job and some doesn't.  There is a big difference when it comes to audio.  Heck, most headphones are eq'd to the point where you probably can't tell, unless you are using the higher end models (It's funny how they always seem to work it that way), the same goes for DAC converters.  As far as expensive cables.  Sometimes you can hear a difference, sometimes you can't.  and it's  all has to do with equipment and which cables you are using, and quite frankly one's ability to detect what is sometimes VERY small minute details.  I usually hear high frequency distortion VERY easily and if I use a cable and detect too much high frequencies, that's the tip off to try another cable.  Then I examine the low bass notes and either they are nice and detailed or they are muddy.  The only thing I can say about cables is, I've heard instances where there was no difference, a little difference, or a noticeable difference and since I can't afford to spend bloody fortune on cables, I try to at least get the best sound I can within a REASONABLE (to me anyways) budget that's a decent quality level.  But I have heard $100K to $300K systems that were unbelievable and I can't say the cables didn't make a difference, but those systems can be just unbelievable.  Some cables just simple lower the noise floor, some slightly change the timbre and do things that are kind of subtle and some people can't tell and some people can.

Anyway, i usually like to sit with the recordings a little while as it's hard to do ABX tests  because i need to get acclimated to the system and recordings so I can pick out where the differences might be.  Sometimes, it's just on certain low frequencies, etc.  I had changed my cables and I noticed the high had a little more air to it and less harsh, but every once in a  while i would have a recording of an upright bass and when it hit certain low notes, the new cables made them sound lifelike whereas the older cable just didn't reproduce them that well.  So, I have to do any listening tests over a long period of time with a lot of recordings to really hear the cables.  That's just the way I am.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Reply #1 –
Quote from: RichDavis on
What is your listening system consist of?  DAC, cables, and headphones, etc.?  Some equipment does a good job and some doesn't.  There is a big difference when it comes to audio.  Heck, most headphones are eq'd to the point where you probably can't tell, unless you are using the higher end models (It's funny how they always seem to work it that way)
Yes, the quality of headphones dominates the perceived audio quality.

Quote from: RichDavis on
the same goes for DAC converters.
Much less so. Contrary to what audiophile forums like to suggests, DACs are a solved problem today as far as consumer equipment goes. If you're really, really concerned, a 100$ ODAC is the ultimate solution.

Quote from: RichDavis on
As far as expensive cables.  Sometimes you can hear a difference, sometimes you can't.
I guess these tests were not double blind, right?

Quote from: RichDavis on
The only thing I can say about cables is, I've heard instances where there was no difference, a little difference, or a noticeable difference
Room acoustics and loudspeakers or headphones.

Quote from: RichDavis on
Some cables just simple lower the noise floor, some slightly change the timbre and do things that are kind of subtle
How does that happen? Any physical or technical explanation to that? Any test results?

Quote from: RichDavis on
Anyway, i usually like to sit with the recordings a little while as it's hard to do ABX tests
I sympathize. It's hard to do an ABX test if the result will likely suggest you have to drop your pre-/misconceptions.

Quote from: RichDavis on
I had changed my cables and I noticed the high had a little more air to it and less harsh, but every once in a  while i would have a recording of an upright bass and when it hit certain low notes, the new cables made them sound lifelike whereas the older cable just didn't reproduce them that well.  So, I have to do any listening tests over a long period of time with a lot of recordings to really hear the cables.
Audiophile gibberish. This forum is exactly the wrong place for that.

Please read the Terms of Service again which you agreed on upon registration. Especially ToS #8.
It's only audiophile if it's inconvenient.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Reply #2 –
Quote from: Kohlrabi on
Quote from: RichDavis on
What is your listening system consist of?  DAC, cables, and headphones, etc.?  Some equipment does a good job and some doesn't.  There is a big difference when it comes to audio.  Heck, most headphones are eq'd to the point where you probably can't tell, unless you are using the higher end models (It's funny how they always seem to work it that way)
Yes, the quality of headphones dominates the perceived audio quality.

Quote from: RichDavis on
the same goes for DAC converters.
Much less so. Contrary to what audiophile forums like to suggests, DACs are a solved problem today as far as consumer equipment goes. If you're really, really concerned, a 100$ ODAC is the ultimate solution.

Quote from: RichDavis on
As far as expensive cables.  Sometimes you can hear a difference, sometimes you can't.
I guess these tests were not double blind, right?

Quote from: RichDavis on
The only thing I can say about cables is, I've heard instances where there was no difference, a little difference, or a noticeable difference
Room acoustics and loudspeakers or headphones.

Quote from: RichDavis on
Some cables just simple lower the noise floor, some slightly change the timbre and do things that are kind of subtle
How does that happen? Any physical or technical explanation to that? Any test results?

Quote from: RichDavis on
Anyway, i usually like to sit with the recordings a little while as it's hard to do ABX tests
I sympathize. It's hard to do an ABX test if the result will likely suggest you have to drop your pre-/misconceptions.

Quote from: RichDavis on
I had changed my cables and I noticed the high had a little more air to it and less harsh, but every once in a  while i would have a recording of an upright bass and when it hit certain low notes, the new cables made them sound lifelike whereas the older cable just didn't reproduce them that well.  So, I have to do any listening tests over a long period of time with a lot of recordings to really hear the cables.
Audiophile gibberish. This forum is exactly the wrong place for that.

Please read the Terms of Service again which you agreed on upon registration. Especially ToS #8.



Sorry, but I don't know who told you that the DAC problems are solved in consumer electronics is nonsense.  The output stage is VERY important aspect of the DAC as that's the portion, on less expensive consumer grade internal DACs?  They don't sound very good as compared to the more expensive USB DACs.  Obviously, there are probably well over 100 USB DACs on the market and they will sound different and it's due to the DAC chip they use as well as the rest of the electronics.  So, I don't buy whatever information someone has given to you that the consumer grade DACs are "fixed". That's kind of a generic statement that I don't buy into.  The URL you listed doesn't explain anything, it's just a $99 motherboard.

Double blind?  That's got nothing to do with it.  It all depends on the tests, what equipment being used, content, etc. I've seen tests that were just the worst tests in the world as they weren't using good content to begin with.  They were using altered drum track and the signal was so short.  So, I would have to do my own tests. Some cables you will hear no difference, a small amount of difference or a very noticeable amount of difference, but I have NOT seen anyone do an ABX test that I would say is well done.  All I can say is, first you have to be in a good environment with no ambient noise to speak of, then you need to have a variety of content, preferably, acoustic instruments of all types where they were recorded without altering of the audio signal (commercial music is highly altered, whereas more audiophile or reference recordings are not), and you have to sit and listen to each cable and identify how well or not so well they do in the entire frequency range and that can take a while for some people.

It you want the best information on what's going on with audio cables, go to MIT Cables' web site.  www.mitcables.com and read their technical papers/white papers as well as their patents, if you wish.  It's probably more advanced information than most people can understand, so if you don't get it with one pass, don't worry, it took me many times to go through their information, but it's definitely helpful to re-read and not pass this information off as BS.  They have some of the top mfg of audio equipment that use their top end cables as reference when designing/testing their products as well as various top end studios use their cables.

Rubbish?  That's being a little on the ignorant side.  I don't work for MIT Cables and I use their cables as well as Transparent Cables (which essentially use the same philosophy) and both of these brands are used in recording studios and mastering studios.  FYI,  Bob Ludwig did the Rolling Stones remasters and they used the top end Transparent Cables throughout their mastering system.  I am NOT going to argue with Bob Ludwig.  If you want to call him up and argue with him over cables, go right ahead.  I don't know what they used for the Beatles recordings, per se.

Again, read MIT Cables technical information on WHY different cables have a different timbre. It's measurable with the right test equipment and measurement tests.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Reply #3 –
Quote from: RichDavis on
It you want the best information on what's going on with audio cables, go to MIT Cables' web site.  www.mitcables.com and read their technical papers/white papers as well as their patents, if you wish.  It's probably more advanced information than most people can understand, so if you don't get it with one pass, don't worry, it took me many times to go through their information, but it's definitely helpful to re-read and not pass this information off as BS.


This might come as a surprise to you, but this is not an audiophile forum, where everybody has an opinion, and every opinion, no matter how ill-informed, is equally valid. A lot of people here have a scientific background and a lot of experience with physics, electronics, acoustics and signal processing. We are used to getting our information from peer-reviewed professional publications, not manufacturer web sites.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Reply #4 –
Quote from: RichDavis on
They don't sound very good as compared to the more expensive USB DACs.


Did you read TOS #8? Please provide your sources (not manufacturers websites or links to audiophile forums opinions) for these results.

[TOS #8] From: Beatles remastered USB vs CD

Reply #5 –
"This rule is the very core of Hydrogenaudio, so it is very important that you follow it."

In case anyone wants to engage in a debate over what ABX is, what it is not and how to interpret test results, please search the forum and reply to any one of several open discussions about it.  This thread is not the place.

Thanks!