IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
The Absolute Sound Magazine listening test, published in the January, 2012 issue (Not TOS8 compliant)
andy o
post Dec 6 2011, 17:00
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 1351
Joined: 14-April 09
Member No.: 68950



Agree that this is the wrong criterion to judge MC for. I've followed this player for years in the HTPC forums, and its strengths are that the developers actually listen to useful user requests, no matter if only a handful of people request it. That has made it the only (that I know of) commercial player for example to integrate madVR as a video renderer and ReClock-like abilities to its audio renderer, its developers having worked closely with madshi and James (developers of those filters). It has grown into the best featured player out there, no need for audiophool nonsense to hype it up.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Dec 6 2011, 18:23
Post #27





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10338
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (Alex B @ Dec 6 2011, 05:14) *
It would be more interesting to tear that "Absolute Sound Magazine listening test" limb from limb.

Obviously, though I don't think the proxy server deserves a pass. We are not a religious-based community, and while people often find this kind of stuff entertaining, it almost never goes over well when someone submits this kind of nonsense and gives no indication that it shouldn't be taken seriously. I feel that it is fair to expect better from those representing commercial interests.

This post has been edited by greynol: Dec 7 2011, 20:26


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donunus
post Dec 6 2011, 18:24
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



Regarding the statement saying that players sound alike, lets just say that I have passed an ABC test of three players where I could determine which player was playing the song we selected for the test. I guessed perfect in 15 times the song was being played. The three players were mediamonkey, Foobar, and J River. Try it yourself and you guys would be surprised at the differences between the players. Make sure to use good headphones of course when comparing them otherwise they will sound the same. I have noticed also that comparing directsound and wasapi within the same player is harder to ABX. I couldn't pass that test even though my first impression was that wasapi sounded smoother. This was either too small to maintain a constant correct guess or was purely placebo on my part as to their differences in sound.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donunus
post Dec 6 2011, 18:29
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



I have a feeling that companies making their players add some sort of subtle yet hidden eq that cannot be bypassed to get their own house sound so to speak because the differences are pretty clear. JRiver is the bassiest, Foobar is thinner yet not so bright, and mediamonkey is slightly punchier than foobar with slightly more treble making the sound seem wider but is not as muddy in the bass as JRiver. I was using my hd600 with this test and I was not looking at the computer while my friend was picking the player to play the song.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JimH
post Dec 8 2011, 21:24
Post #30





Group: Members
Posts: 149
Joined: 14-July 02
From: Minneapolis
Member No.: 2588



QUOTE (andy o @ Dec 6 2011, 11:00) *
That has made it the only (that I know of) commercial player for example to integrate madVR as a video renderer and ReClock-like abilities to its audio renderer, its developers having worked closely with madshi and James (developers of those filters). It has grown into the best featured player out there, no need for audiophool nonsense to hype it up.

Thanks. Just a minor correction. The Videoclock feature is ours, and not based on Reclock, though it has a similar purpose. We've also worked with babgvant and nevcairiel. It's been fun.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zarggg
post Dec 9 2011, 06:36
Post #31





Group: Members
Posts: 566
Joined: 18-January 04
From: bethlehem.pa.us
Member No.: 11318



Since I'm not an audio expert (my background is primarily in networking technology, and slightly less in programming), all I can contribute is that a "64-bit internal data path" does nothing except optimize memory transactions. At best, it will improve the speed at which the program operates.

It cannot and will not have any direct affect on the decoded audio, unless the prior, 32-bit, implementation threw away data chunks or ordered them incorrectly. And I certainly hope that was not the case.

This post has been edited by Zarggg: Dec 9 2011, 06:39
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Roseval
post Dec 9 2011, 13:55
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 496
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 52303



64-bit internal data path means that all DSP is done in 64 bit float to keep the quantization error down


--------------------
TheWellTemperedComputer.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alikris
post Dec 9 2011, 22:11
Post #33





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 3-December 11
Member No.: 95570



QUOTE (JimH @ Dec 4 2011, 15:35) *
I think the important thing about the article in The Absolute Sound is that the entire audiophile community is now being exposed to computer audio in a way that will probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption. Until now, the merits of computer audio have been controversial for many audiophiles.


That whole paragraph is just wrong on so many levels.

"probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption" Oh great! And here was me thinking Audiofoolery was already plagued with far too much superstition and idiocy blink.gif

This post has been edited by Alikris: Dec 9 2011, 22:12
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JimH
post Dec 9 2011, 23:03
Post #34





Group: Members
Posts: 149
Joined: 14-July 02
From: Minneapolis
Member No.: 2588



QUOTE (Alikris @ Dec 9 2011, 16:11) *
QUOTE (JimH @ Dec 4 2011, 15:35) *
I think the important thing about the article in The Absolute Sound is that the entire audiophile community is now being exposed to computer audio in a way that will probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption. Until now, the merits of computer audio have been controversial for many audiophiles.


That whole paragraph is just wrong on so many levels.

"probably cause a major new wave of experimentation and adoption" Oh great! And here was me thinking Audiofoolery was already plagued with far too much superstition and idiocy blink.gif

Audiophiles are (all) fools? Is that your point?

Whether you agree with them or not, and I suppose you may not, they still deserve your respect and consideration. They love what they do, just as you probably do.

They're on a quest for perfection. Sometimes they get a little off the path. That doesn't make them fools.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kraut
post Dec 10 2011, 03:49
Post #35





Group: Members
Posts: 227
Joined: 24-November 10
Member No.: 85965



QUOTE
Whether you agree with them or not, and I suppose you may not, they still deserve your respect and consideration


Why do fools deserve my respect? A quest for a perfection is fine, but to claim as truth what is only experienced subjectively without ever being verified or even verifiable is nothing but foolishness. Do UFO "abductees" deserve my respect?
They might deserve my consideration - as nutcases, but nothing more. I have for too long engaged in fruitless discussions to take any of the lot seriously.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
andy o
post Dec 10 2011, 04:13
Post #36





Group: Members
Posts: 1351
Joined: 14-April 09
Member No.: 68950



Adam Savage just reminded this to his twitter followers.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JimH
post Dec 10 2011, 14:23
Post #37





Group: Members
Posts: 149
Joined: 14-July 02
From: Minneapolis
Member No.: 2588



QUOTE (kraut @ Dec 9 2011, 21:49) *
Why do fools deserve my respect? A quest for a perfection is fine, but to claim as truth what is only experienced subjectively without ever being verified or even verifiable is nothing but foolishness. Do UFO "abductees" deserve my respect?
They might deserve my consideration - as nutcases, but nothing more. I have for too long engaged in fruitless discussions to take any of the lot seriously.

Did I mention that I was once abducted by audiophiles?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kraut
post Dec 10 2011, 14:35
Post #38





Group: Members
Posts: 227
Joined: 24-November 10
Member No.: 85965



QUOTE
Did I mention that I was once abducted by audiophiles?


No, but many things become clear now...

Did they insert various cables into your orifices?

I was a member of AA (audiophiles anonymous)

This post has been edited by kraut: Dec 10 2011, 14:44
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JimH
post Dec 10 2011, 14:49
Post #39





Group: Members
Posts: 149
Joined: 14-July 02
From: Minneapolis
Member No.: 2588



Everything was gold plated.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
testyou
post Dec 11 2011, 03:01
Post #40





Group: Members
Posts: 99
Joined: 24-September 10
Member No.: 84113



What's the point of this thread?
Can I report it now?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Case
post Dec 11 2011, 10:53
Post #41





Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2288
Joined: 19-October 01
From: Finland
Member No.: 322



Report button is for reporting spam or illegal content. Hydrogenaudio forum is about telling people the truth behind silly audiophile claims like player applications having different audio quality, not about hiding them like such claims do not exist. If someone was to google for this Absolute Sound Magazine listening test I'd like them to find a link to this forum where it is revealed to be bullshit. Not link to some nonsense forum where people blindly praise how superior JRiver player is.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bennetng
post Dec 11 2011, 12:57
Post #42





Group: Members
Posts: 239
Joined: 22-December 05
Member No.: 26587



QUOTE (testyou @ Dec 11 2011, 10:01) *
What's the point of this thread?

To demonstrate the importance of TOS#8. If TOS#8 is removed HA will be flooded with this kind of posts.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kotekzot
post Dec 26 2011, 17:51
Post #43





Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 9-May 06
Member No.: 30599



QUOTE (Alex B @ Dec 4 2011, 19:39) *
Without seeing the complete article it is difficult to say anything about that test, but it looks seriously flawed. For example it claims that resampling from 176 kHz to 192 kHz or even just increasing the bit depth from 24-bit to 32-bit produces audibly better quality: "Additional height and clarity improvement." smile.gif

Oh my god WHAT. I suppose they also think turning the volume up makes the sound higher quality, and dynamic range compression too. You'd think they would at least pick up the basics after devoting so much time and money to this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th December 2014 - 18:38