Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Validated News / Re: Opus 1.2 is out!
Last post by Steve Forte Rio -
Thanks!

Why ther is no Win-32 build on the official download page?
2
Case will need to provide info on how he coded it. It's still the only crossfeed plugin I've found that sounds natural.
3
Thank you very much for your test and detailed answer.
I have increased midrange in EQ however May be this is because my headphones have weaker and a little veiled midrange.

May you please test these tracks also?

(These aren't in same album but when I use track gain and play with track gain applied, 03 is loader/harsher in my ear (violin parts) but 01 is weaker because of voice of singer and I should increase volume in 01 after I listened to 03 with my optimal volume But without replaygain when I jump from 03 to 01 or reverse, both have good volume and I don't need to change volume)

(I mean without track gain both these tracks are in same volume but after applied track gain to them and play them with track gain applied, I need change volume when I jump from one to another)

(These files I attached also are original version without replaygain tag)

Thank you very much
5
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/
6
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.


7
::

...or this one:

GoneMAD Music Player

Regards, ...

::
8
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.
9
Volume match and you'll soon realize they aren't that different after all; especially now that you know they're both compressed.
10
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