Audio quality and Vista
Reply #119 – 2008-04-19 11:01:23
Andrew, I don't understand. We have already resolved everything, now it is up to the individual reader to find them... or really have we? We have Woodinville stating that default Vista triumphs over default XP technically when there is mixing and resampling involved with a few others backing him up. I finally understand the technical details (better resampler, no more lowest common denominator, etc). But as for audible differences, all we have is Woodinville's citation of user anecdotes.Gentlemen, some are quick to retort that if there are audible differences, there is no need to perform an ABX test to confirm them. However, if there ARE audible differences, wouldn't an ABX test be exceedingly easy to pass? In other words, "come on, you have better ears, can't you just indulge the eyes of your fellow forumers in the name of science?" Also, Woodinville has been quick to assure us that even without the mixing and resampling, default Vista still trumps default XP, citing user anecdotes, including post #18 . There has been no ABX tests performed so far . We have Hancoque's graphs detailing the slight technical superiority of an optimised XP setup over default Vista. I stated that this is as good as saying no one can hear a difference, and Woodinville disputes me without explicitly stating the counter-case. There has been no ABX tests performed so far . I am afraid that some people simply refuse to read for themselves. That said, I previously mentioned that the best selling point of Vista's audio system for me was the per-application control. I am also relieved that this independence extends to the fundamental way Vista treats audio streams now. This is undoubtedly thanks to Woodinville's efforts. That does not mean, however, that he can throw his weight around on a forum where scientific principles are adhered to. By no means does a validation of the default case imply that the 'special case' obeys the same conclusion. By the way, I'm still surprised no one else bothered to confront the 'audiophile speak' in post #18 . I'm also surprised that up till this point, Woodinville has chosen to go on a witch-hunt instead of categorically backing up all his assertions with concrete evidence, in attempting to salvage his reputation from my (harsh, but up till now still justified) comment about his previous employer. Jaz, the default resampling setting in XP (at the least, SP2 for sure) is set to 'Best', not 'Fast'. I believe that when comparisons were made, SP2 was the XP version involved.Have some respect for the excellent – progressive and realistic forum this is – don’t try to turn it into one of the 100+ A/V forums full of audiofools that revel in spewing disinformation and madness… We will all do well to keep this in mind. I have seen my fair share of unqualified morons taint this forum. I certainly expect qualified individuals to live up to their qualifications, as well as intellectual superiority. Intellectual superiority carries (or at least is supposed to carry) with it a heightened sense of objectivity . -------------------------------------------------- Andrew has already set up test files for any and everybody to crack their ears on. --------------------------------------------------foo_abx 1.3.3 report foobar2000 v0.9.5.2 beta 2 2008/04/19 19:24:34 File A: C:\Documents and Settings\Shaun\desktop\First Minute - Exactly at 60 WinVista Business.wav File B: C:\Documents and Settings\Shaun\desktop\First Minute - Exactly at 60 WinXP Pro.wav 19:24:34 : Test started. 19:27:29 : 00/01 100.0% 19:27:48 : 01/02 75.0% 19:28:07 : Trial reset. 19:32:24 : 01/01 50.0% 19:33:07 : 01/02 75.0% 19:34:30 : 01/03 87.5% 19:36:32 : 01/04 93.8% 19:37:54 : 02/05 81.3% 19:38:27 : 03/06 65.6% 19:39:07 : 04/07 50.0% 19:39:54 : 04/08 63.7% 19:40:44 : 05/09 50.0% 19:41:26 : 05/10 62.3% 19:41:57 : 06/11 50.0% 19:42:28 : 07/12 38.7% 19:43:07 : 08/13 29.1% 19:45:26 : 09/14 21.2% 19:46:25 : 10/15 15.1% 19:46:58 : 11/16 10.5% 19:47:23 : 11/17 16.6% 19:48:59 : 12/18 11.9% 19:49:20 : 13/19 8.4% 19:50:12 : 13/20 13.2% 19:52:34 : Test finished. ---------- Total: 14/22 (14.3%) No ReplayGain (can't replaygain wav files, but track scan shows identical volume), DSP settings were Convert Mono to Stereo, PPHS Resampler (Ultra). Equipment: Mylarone X3i Output: First ~15 trials DirectSound, next ~7 trials Kernel Streaming (sorry, I know this is bullcrap methodology, let me explain) I actually heard the difference more with DS than with KS (hence the shrinking p-value). But I had to crank up the volume to an uncomfortable level (especially for an in-ear), and the difference was so slight I didn't manage to push the p-value below 0.01 (1%). I'll try this later at night when ambient noise is lower. The part that I was analysing was 0:27, the cymbals on the opening of the next stanza, right on the bass guitar note that succeeded a string of bass notes and a pause. Sorry for my music illiteracy...