Originally posted by rc55 I'd say it'd be a good idea to keep this topic either sticky and/or locked.... Unless Beatles has anything to say!!!
Also... perhaps you could make a facility for submitting difficult samples with ABX data or whatever.
Originally posted by ff123 It's a many-headed hydra. Just as soon as one can show that a particular individual setting is inferior to --alt-preset standard (such as -q0 -V0 -b160 --athlower 1 lowpass 20.5), another one pops up with an additional tweak ("This one gets close to or is as good as aps, which sounds 'brash' to me, maybe even better because aps uses joint-stereo, which must logically degrade the stereo image; and what's more, I didn't even try hard, just used the default settings with a couple of tweaks -- aps must be in need of improvement!").
In one thread, I took two easy-to-hear samples, showing just two different types of artifacts on which --alt-preset standard is superior to the command line in question. But rumors die hard -- since I didn't listen to samples which might possibly have stereo separation problems (although I am willing to upload reasonably short samples to my page -- no multi-hundred megabyte files, please), the argument goes, aps may be inferior in that regard.
I think the best way to kill off inferior command lines is to test them one by one. But perhaps there should be some record which documents each death. And for those that refuse to die, just keep adding samples
Originally posted by cadabra3 As a Psychologist (forgive me ahead of time); I see this kind of thing all the time- someone puts X number of hours into something and almost immediately people start looking for flaws- real or not. They feel they must devalue someone elses work to validate themselves.
Originally posted by ff123 I think the best way to kill off inferior command lines is to test them one by one. ff123
To sum it up: what is an improvement to one person, might be a quality lowering for another.like: I'd never use the normal "--alt-preset standard" because that 18.6-19.2 kHz lowpass is too low for my taste, but for someone that hears like up to 17kHz this wouldn't be an issue while some echo problems I don't hear in --r3mix might be for them.
no-one hears the difference between a 19.5kHz lowpassed signal and the same full-range clip in a double-blind test. It's been proven by science many times before (even with 18.5khz on a very significant number of youngsters) and I did the test myself on my site&forum. In a poll only two people claimed they heard a difference between a 18.5khz and a full range one and the difference was gone at 19kHz. The 19.5 is an extra safety margin.
Originally posted by JohnV Well, just read Roel's (r3mix's) comment about alt-preset standard.. (http://188.8.131.52/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board...&num=1013249202)
To sum it up: what is an improvement to one person, might be a quality lowering for another.
So, Roel seems to say that he can hear a difference because of lower lowpass than --r3mix, because he would never use --alt preset standard because its lowpass is lower.
Also Roel seems to have the wrong impression that --aps is just a pre-echo fix... oh well..
I've never really seen this verified, that being an improvement to one person being a degredation to another with almost all other things being equal..
Originally posted by Pio2001 Roel didn't say he would never use APS, he was just giving an example of what someone not willing to use it could say.
Originally posted by JohnV Also one thing to consider when comparing this small lowpass difference and saying --aps might sound muffled to very young people when compared to --r3mix, is of course ringing and high freq accuracy in general.If a very young person might be able to hear a difference here (very unlikely but I won't say impossible), it's even more likely one will also hear the increased high frequency ringing of --r3mix. But of course Roel didn't consider this aspect.. only what it looks like "on a paper"..So, Roel's attempt to downplay --aps with lowpass issue is pretty ridiculous considering that.
Originally posted by JohnV Hey Dib, a bit OT. Could you make those pics a bit smaller size, maybe link for full size pics.I mean loading of this thread takes some serious time with lower connection speeds atm..
Originally posted by Gecko wonder how he kept the needle from skipping; probably added a lot of weight
Originally posted by Pio2001 It much easier : DJ often remove completely the counterweight, so that all the catridge weights fully on the stylus :rofl: