LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  February 2013

ARSCLIST February 2013

Subject:

Re: Audibility of 44/16 ?

From:

Clark Johnsen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 9 Feb 2013 18:15:41 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (118 lines)

Tom,

Agree pretty much all around, and thanks for saying it. So you took not
only your own record, but your own TT as well? Wow! That's dedication. Uh,
was that the Tech store down by MIT? Or later up at Harvard Square? I knew
both very well.

"ABX testing on a strange system in a strange room with strange material
[is] like taking a guy who's never tasted wine and asking him whether red
or white is 'better'." Yes indeed, plus this: Even with two reds, the
unintiated guy is altogether more likely to prefer the simple, easy one --
not the good Bordeaux.

Absolute Polarity is known to academics as a monaural phase effect (MPE) so
the simpler the recording the more likely the effect is to be
distinguished; two-mic stereo is equally discernible. Also a
low-phase-distortion loudspeaker system really helps, but good luck with
that.

clark



On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Although this is a futile "argument" and digital WON the mass media
> decades ago, I'm feeling masochistic today so I'll wade in  ...
>
> If you put most people in a room that is not their own with a sound system
> that is not their own, ABX testing probably doesn't tell you much about
> anything but gross differences in sounds. Subtle stuff like whether the
> 44.1/16 digital is correctly bringing out low-level ambience,
> channel-to-channel sums and differences and "air and space" will be just
> about impossible for most people to hear. Even if you're a trained aural
> expert with very good hearing, that's a tough situation. The same reason
> why it's so hard to select sound source components that you like from
> "comparing" in a showroom. Back in the day when phono cartridges sounded
> very different and some Japanese equipment was full of transient
> distortions, yeah you could tell right away what sounds you didn't like.
> It's different now, differences are subtle. You have to listen very
> carefully, to material you know very well, then make your own decisions.
>
> There have been reams of BS written on all sides of these "arguments." It
> tends to come down to "chocolate or vanilla" with the subtle stuff -- some
> people will like one thing and others will like another.
>
> As for absolute polarity, I only care about it in how it effects whether I
> like a total recording or not. And, I can't tell you which I prefer. I just
> know when percussives sound "wrong" and when a recording is "fighting" the
> speaker. Most stuff I like is mixed and complex, using several or many
> microphones and often many tracks and overdubs, mixing effects, etc.
> Therefore, who knows what polarity issues crop up and how they effect the
> ultimate product. I suspect it's that way with most people. If you like
> listening to one drum from one mic, then the issue is much more simple. But
> if you listen to a "produced" musical product that went through many stages
> from mics to mass media, who knows what happened to polarity of any element
> at any time, and it doesn't matter unless it doesn't sound "right." To my
> ears, a much bigger worry is dynamics crunching, digital clipping, really
> bad mixing of the stereo sound-picture, etc.
>
> One of the audiophillics mags had a column a while back going after
> so-called "demo tracks" that people like to use to show off their system. I
> have to say, I have never heard much of what was called out because it's
> very obscure stuff, but the point was, a person should "demo" anything new
> using music he is very familiar with and not worry whether it's a "show-off
> recording" or other such BS. Which brings me back to ABX testing on a
> strange system in a strange room with strange material. That's like taking
> a guy who's never tasted wine and asking him whether red or white is
> "better." And it reminds me of the first time I went speaker shopping, as a
> teen at the late great Tech Hifi store. I thought they ALL sounded bad
> because the guy was playing, loudly, music that I didn't like (the Tubes,
> if I recall correctly) and using a turntable and cartridge very different
> from my modest rig. I went to another store, but this time brought my
> turntable and a record I knew very well (nothing spectacular as far as
> sound quality, it was a Capitol 1970s pressing of "Sgt Pepper"). I very
> quickly was able to decide what kind of speakers I liked and didn't and
> could clearly hear a range of differences, both in timbres and in
> bass-mid-treble balances. In that case, the strange room was somewhat
> compensated by familiar source material.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard L. Hess" <
> [log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 11:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Audibility of 44/16 ?
>
>
>  Hi, Goran,
>>
>> This is an excellent read. When I got my first two PCM-F1 adapters, I put
>> them back to back by jumpering the video out of one to the video in of the
>> other. I was pleasantly surprised at the lack of audible artifacts except
>> the noise when there was no input signal. This of course was much after the
>> fact, about 2002 or so, but it was still interesting to do.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 2013-02-09 3:28 AM, Goran Finnberg wrote:
>>
>>> And now for some fun reading:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.bostonaudiosociety.**org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.**htm<http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
>> http://www.richardhess.com/**tape/contact.htm<http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm>
>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
>>
>>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager