Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Since the thread has moved to discussing which perceptual coders running at which modest bitrates are being used by YouTube, it seems clear that no way is YouTube a reasonable medium for materials that would be used in listening tests related to so-called high resolution audio.

I'm continuing to study the matter, but it seems that in general video distribution format audio is generally based on good modern perceptual coders running at reasonable data rates.

On the one hand they should not be problematical for people who want good sound quality, but on the other hand they  seem to fatal to the comfort of most Placebophiles whose oft-stated doctrine is "Everything Matters".

Interesting factoid:  The before and after musical selections in this  video apparently posted by Synergistic research has a broad band level change in the "Before" and "after" segments: https://youtu.be/LlF-uP3lM44

The real irony is that the 5 dB louder passage is the segment that adds a goodly number of what are purported to be acoustic reflection treatments and noise reducers. ????????????????

Here is an interesting post. Here we have Placebophiles claiming to be disappointed by hearing no differences, when there is a good possibility that level differences on the order of 5 dB were being added and removed.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/31577-synergistic-research-scam/
2
Some comprehensive analysis and thoughts about MQA working. Archimago does measurements of audioquest-dragonfly-black

I like Archimago and post on his forum, but the relevance of what he finds is limited by the fact that there don't seem to be any reliable listening tests to back it up. Many of the things he tests are among the easiest kinds of things to DBT.

Since I'm 70 and suffering from additional  neural damage related to the extensive chemotherapy that was part of  my recent (apparently successful) bout with Stage 3 colorectal cancer, this is a game I can't directly help with. 

Most of his measured results seem to relate to things that I wouldn't expect to sound much different, one way or the other.


3
::

...or this one:

GoneMAD Music Player

Regards, ...

::
4
The first track has much more energy in the mid frequencies where ear is the most sensitive. Without ReplayGain it also sounds louder to my ears. It seems intentional that the mixer and/or artist intended the fast guitar track to be louder than the next slower track. And album gain is meant to preserve such artistic choices.

Simple RMS and the original ReplayGain algorithm also agree with the loudness differences. Original ReplayGain algo estimates the difference even higher than the ITU method used by foobar2000. Personally I'm very pleased with the results foobar gives.

Edit: Do you use EQ that alters the frequency response lowering mids? That would be one explanation to your perception difference.
5
Volume match and you'll soon realize they aren't that different after all; especially now that you know they're both compressed.
6
You said the vinyl sounds great, so now you know the CD sounds great too.  You might even now think the CD sounds better if your turntable is less than perfect or if your vinyl has playback problems, or succumbs to playback problems in the future. ;)
hi
well english is not my native language
i wanted to say that the vinyl sounds for me not so clipped , i have used headphones and i can't hear clipped part like the cd
maybe it's my turntable
but seens you said
Quote
The vinyl was sourced from the same clipped master used to create the CD.
i'm wrong , and my ears have fooled me
7
You said the vinyl sounds great, so now you know the CD sounds great too.  You might even now think the CD sounds better if your turntable is less than perfect or if your vinyl has playback problems, or succumbs to playback problems in the future. ;)
8
A Moon Shaped Pool?

The vinyl was sourced from the same clipped master used to create the CD.
yes A Moon Shaped Pool
i'm really sad , just because i spent 80€ for the cd and the vinyl
i guess the hi-res is the same of the cd , i will give up , even it's one of my favorite album
thanks Greynol
9
A Moon Shaped Pool?

The vinyl was sourced from the same clipped master used to create the CD.
10
In my EAC folder I have lame.exe and lame_enc.dll.    It appears to be using the exe file, although EAC is very configurable and there may be a way to make it use the dll. 
hi DVDdoug
thanks a lot , but can't find a way to use lame_enc.dll
may i ask you what do you use to burn audio cd?


Quote
If the high-resolution version is a different mix/master, you could copy the high-resolution version to CD (downsampling to 16/44.1, of course) and it will sound identical to the original high-resolution version.
thanks again
i have spent 80€ for the last radiohead cd and vinyl (it's one of my favorite album and they record clipped at least my cd copy it's so clipped i can hear even crackles)  , i know there are hardware players for hi-res audio file
i'm skeptical about these players