Skip to main content

Topic: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluation (Read 20643 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • board
  • [*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #375
Perhaps also the Jackson paper from 2016, if possible.
Thanks :-)!

Please consult the relevant threads here that were posted at the time. It is easier than having us all rconstruct them for your benefit just because you don't want to do a few minutes research.

Fair enough :-).
However, I just spent some time doing that now and didn't get much the wiser. Theiss' paper is the one with the highest score, yet I couldn't find any info on it on this website, except that the name was mentioned twice in the same post in this very thread. The two Jackson papers I couldn't find much info on HA about either. They were discussed quickly in this topic as well, although I think it might have been one of those two papers where you mentioened that the transition band was too narrow.
Before searching, I had an impression my search would be fairly fruitless (maybe I searched recently and forgot these were the results), but I also had the impression that you, Arny, read most of the papers mentioned in the meta-analysis after the meta-analysis was published, as the only person here on HA.
But I understand that what I'm asking is a lot. I just hoped that you, Arny, could recap in a few words why each of the high-scoring papers were unreliable, as I think this might be useful for several of us - not only me right now, then also others who will look up the matter in the future.
But if you decline I understand :-).
Thanks anyway.
"What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
- Christopher Hitchens
"It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge"
- Sam Harris

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #376
Theiss' paper is the one with the highest score
Of what?

The two Jackson papers
Of what relevance?
Scores?
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • board
  • [*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #377
Theiss' paper is the one with the highest score
Of what?

The two Jackson papers
Of what relevance?
Scores?

I see now that Arny mentioned earlier that Theiss' paper is not musical content but impulses, although it did mention a symphony. Anyway, it said 74.51 % correct answers in differentiating hi-res from CD quality.
"What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
- Christopher Hitchens
"It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge"
- Sam Harris

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #378
Anyway, it said 74.51 % correct answers in differentiating hi-res from CD quality.
Nope, not what Theis Hawksford paper said.

But since you like keeping score:

Quote
REISS
In summary.... the causes are still unknown
Score: Zero
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • board
  • [*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #379
Anyway, it said 74.51 % correct answers in differentiating hi-res from CD quality.
Nope, not what Theis Hawksford paper said.

But since you like keeping score:

Quote
REISS
In summary.... the causes are still unknown
Score: Zero

Okay, fair enough. As I'm not able to read the Theiss paper, but only the meta-analysis, which I've only had a quick glance at, then it says 74.51 % in the table on page 5 in the meta-analysis. Anyway, I'll have a more thorough look at the meta analysis.
"What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
- Christopher Hitchens
"It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge"
- Sam Harris

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #380
it says 74.51 % in the table on page 5
Yep. With 4 question mark columns.

And "supertweeters" again being "added".
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • board
  • [*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #381
But I suppose there's nothing wrong with adding supertweeters. After all, some speakers are constructed like that, although I am aware that they are rare (my first "serious" stereo system, a Sony midi system in the mid 90s, had super tweeters), and to hear any supersonic content, if there is any to be heard, which I'm still skeptical of, then obviously we need equipment that's able to play it.
As for the question marks, almost all of the studies have some of those, although, obviously, it would be best if they didn't have any. The Theiss paper is after all deemed "neutral", but...
"What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"
- Christopher Hitchens
"It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge"
- Sam Harris

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #382
I suppose there's nothing wrong with adding supertweeters.
Supposition isn't science.

As for the question marks
They need answers, before "scoring".

Quote
REISS

In summary.....the causes are still unknown
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • Joe Bloggs
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #383
I thought it was common agreement here that supersonics should be handled by separate [call them supertweeters if you may] so that IMD does not creep into audible frequencies?

But yes, if the meta-analysis itself put so many question marks on the study...

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #384
I thought it was common agreement here that supersonics should be handled by separate [call them supertweeters if you may] so that IMD does not creep into audible frequencies?
Not that I'm aware of.
None of the "add on" ST studies seem to mention any specifics of filtering (or IMD).
Plenty "tweeters" capable of >20Khz response...ala the BS study using a SEAS in the Meridian speaker.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #385
I wonder how many times I have seen "BS" here, only to ask myself whether it's supposed to read as "B for bull" or "S for Stuart".

  • krabapple
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #386
Correct.

  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: Next page in the hi-rez media scam: A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluati
Reply #387
I wonder how many times I have seen "BS" here, only to ask myself whether it's supposed to read as "B for bull" or "S for Stuart".
We should talk about MQA Bob in the future to prevent confusion. We also have a typical hand movement:

Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!