IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Results for 24bit/96KHz test, vs. 16bit/44.1KHz
listen
post Jan 4 2004, 06:20
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 12-September 03
Member No.: 8809



I've been trying tigre's 24/96 test proposed in this thread, and also discussed at Afterdawn.

High definition stuff is also discussed here, here, and samples are here, but yeah, we've got a listening test thread now, so might as well use it...

My equipment is an M-Audio Revolution 7.1 feeding straight to Sennheiser HD 200 headphones. I downloaded Lovely_1.wv and used foobar2000 to do resampling, replaygaining, and ABXing. At first I was using waveOut, but then I retested them all using Kernel Streaming.

Anyway, I can ABX (with less than 1% chance of guessing):

[24/96] vs. [24/96->16/44.1->24/96] (slow resampling, dither)
[24/96] vs. [24/96->24/44.1->24/96] (slow resampling)
[24/96] vs. [24/96->16/96->24/96] (dither)

My results varied a bit, but all were significant. The first test I did, I was not expecting to hear any difference, so I was very careful, and got 12/12. Since then I've had 12/12s, 11/12s, a 10/10, and an 8/8 (got interrupted but still a valid result, and it was only a retest...)

The most consistently hearable difference for me is when I listen between 5.2 and 7.2 seconds. Some sort of drum gets hit at about 5.7s. The high definition one is somehow more convincing. Today I was thinking of the good one as a push and the bad one as a pull, but yeah that's not a very helpdul description..

I'm also hearing other differences, but it's hard to know whether I'm being tipped off by something while focussing on something else, or even what the actual difference is in objective terms.

So, what could be wrong? What else would be worth testing? I was thinking of noise shaping the output maybe...
I'm not that keen to do a huge amount of retesting with every possible combination, but if someone thinks of something important I'll be sure to check it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Pio2001
post Jun 7 2004, 20:43
Post #2


Moderator


Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3936
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 73



QUOTE (WmAx @ Jun 2 2004, 01:52 AM)
A signficant issue is that Oohashi was not able to achieve postitive results with LCS compared to baseline. However, he was able to achieve positive results whith FRS vs. HCS. THis is not logical. I can not conclude his results have any validity in this circumstance.

If the high frequency content is directly exciting ANYTHING in a human, then why is it when isolated, no positive results were acheivable? What did cuase the positive results when HF was added to the high cut?


This is illogical if we assume that the cause of a supposed audible difference between HCS and FCS, or to put it in simple words, low definition vs high definition, comes from an intermodulation between two neighborous ultrasonic frequencies.
But this is not sure. Other experiments, like Griesinger's one ( http://world.std.com/~griesngr/intermod.ppt ) that can be easily reproduced (but can easily fry your tweeters), show that even between an audible and an inaudible frequency, no intermodulation is audible. So there may be another process at work. The most likely that I can thing of is a distorded impulse response. Distorded in a way that can't be modelized in terms of harmonic or intermodulation distortion. The ear would thus react differently to a lowpassed impulse than to a full range impulse. But it does not imply that it should react in any way to a high passed impulse.
Your point is interesting, but this apparent inconsistency doesn't surprise me. Actually, all this stuff is inconsistent to begin with : we know that past a given frequency, pure tones can't be heard, and it seems proven that these frequency don't intermodulate with lower ones in our ears. Thus it would be illogical that high definition audio formats can sound any different than low definition ones (talking about sample rate only).
So dismissing this result just because of this is quite the same as dismissing it just because it is successful.


QUOTE (WmAx @ Jun 2 2004, 01:52 AM)
Addressing your comment:

IF the standard 44.1khz sample rate represents human auditory range, then how can this be logical? If the original source has audible IMD componentes(I'm sure many do) as a result of inaudible and audible frequency reactions, then the audible components/modulations will still reside within the audible band. These will be recorded faithfully since the artifacts are created before recording. Maybe I did not understand you?

-Chris


No I was not talking about this at all.
I considered the following argument :

1-The spectrum analysis shows that musical instruments have weak high frequency content.
2-Tests have showed that even strong high frequency content don't intermodulate with audible frequency
Conclusion : higher sample rate can't improve audio quality.


And I object that the spectrum analysis of musical instruments only show the average level of their high frequency content, while the instant level, especially in percussive instruments, during transients (=impulses) might be much higher.

It should be shown using spectrograms (3D graphs with vertical = frequency, horizontal = time, color = intensity) instead of spectrum analysis (2D graph with vertical = intensity and horizontal = frequency), but there again, I wonder if changing the analyser setting (using a shorter window analysis) would not show even higher HF content.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- listen   Results for 24bit/96KHz test   Jan 4 2004, 06:20
- - tigre   Thanks for the effort, listen. I hope this will en...   Jan 4 2004, 18:53
- - listen   I just tried another ABX test. This time it was 9...   Jan 5 2004, 08:11
- - tigre   Intreseting. Mabe we're getting closer to trac...   Jan 5 2004, 13:11
- - listen   Hi tigre, I'm not sure why I didn't check ...   Jan 6 2004, 07:48
- - KikeG   Such rate of success in ABX makes the results a li...   Jan 6 2004, 16:22
- - KikeG   Ok, finally I got to generate the test files. Dow...   Jan 7 2004, 10:52
- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (KikeG @ Jan 7 2004, 09:52 AM)Don't...   Jan 7 2004, 11:26
- - KikeG   Now, when you have tried the test files at my prev...   Jan 7 2004, 12:06
- - listen   Thanks for the input, I'll start working throu...   Jan 7 2004, 23:49
- - Pio2001   I tried to ABX KikeG's files : lovely_short vs...   Jan 9 2004, 00:31
- - listen   Ok, I had a session last night and got some result...   Jan 9 2004, 02:13
- - Pio2001   My soundcard doesn't support kernel streaming....   Jan 9 2004, 12:22
- - Continuum   OT: QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Jan 9 2004, 12:31 AM)......   Jan 9 2004, 14:59
- - KikeG   Very interesting... Listen, could you try another...   Jan 10 2004, 12:25
- - Garf   QUOTE (listen @ Jan 9 2004, 03:13 AM)lovely_d...   Jan 10 2004, 12:47
- - listen   Sure I will try the next batch, and double check f...   Jan 11 2004, 00:57
- - Continuum   QUOTE (listen @ Jan 11 2004, 12:57 AM)the dif...   Jan 11 2004, 08:43
- - Garf   QUOTE (Continuum @ Jan 11 2004, 09:43 AM)If y...   Jan 11 2004, 10:51
- - Continuum   QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 11 2004, 10:51 AM)Another p...   Jan 11 2004, 11:35
- - Garf   Some more stuff to test with: http://sjeng.org/ft...   Jan 11 2004, 14:02
- - listen   Just thought I should say that I'm leaving tow...   Jan 14 2004, 03:38
- - listen   I got motivated by a thread I saw the other day......   Mar 31 2004, 04:57
- - tigre   listen, thanks for still spending time on this. T...   Mar 31 2004, 08:39
- - tigre   QUOTE (listen @ Mar 31 2004, 05:57 AM)I had a...   Mar 31 2004, 08:47
- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (listen @ Jan 10 2004, 11:57 PM)About v...   Mar 31 2004, 10:51
- - phwip   Please forgive my ignorance as a complete newbie t...   Mar 31 2004, 11:40
- - listen   Well yes you pretty much sum it up perfectly in my...   Mar 31 2004, 12:36
- - tigre   phwip: immagine you throw a coin 10 times. The pro...   Mar 31 2004, 14:12
- - tigre   QUOTE (listen @ Mar 31 2004, 01:36 PM)Well ye...   Mar 31 2004, 14:22
- - sshd   I hate statistics: The probability to get 11 corr...   Mar 31 2004, 14:33
- - Pio2001   It is perfectly valid, and recommended, to train o...   Mar 31 2004, 19:39
- - phwip   Thanks Pio2001, that makes things much clearer for...   Mar 31 2004, 22:23
- - listen   I've got a master volume, and also faders for ...   Mar 31 2004, 22:44
- - listen   Thanks for the stats sshd.. QUOTE (sshd @ Mar...   Apr 1 2004, 05:39
- - KikeG   Ok, I've been quite absent from some time here...   Apr 2 2004, 16:40
- - tigre   Thanks for your answer, KikeG. I've been think...   Apr 2 2004, 18:08
- - Pio2001   When you add two sinusoides of different frequenci...   Apr 2 2004, 20:56
- - listen   Hi tigre.. I don't have a separate headphone a...   Apr 3 2004, 01:38
- - listen   Well, if the difference frequencies appear mostly ...   Apr 6 2004, 02:49
- - Pio2001   What do you mean ? If the 4 kHz frequency of our e...   Apr 6 2004, 11:47
- - listen   Oh. . No, I was thinking of KikeG's speculati...   Apr 14 2004, 23:31
- - listen   Well.. I've been busy again, but I see I haven...   May 13 2004, 07:30
- - listen   I thought I should clarify this 'result pickin...   May 14 2004, 02:11
- - Pio2001   It's been a long time since I read this thread...   May 14 2004, 11:18
- - listen   So, quite sincerely, if my Sennheiser's are no...   May 20 2004, 12:50
- - Pio2001   I don't know, but for me, it was not a waste o...   May 20 2004, 16:09
- - WmAx   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ May 20 2004, 07:09 AM)I don...   Jun 1 2004, 16:00
- - Pio2001   Thank you for the link, WmAx, Very interesting. I...   Jun 2 2004, 01:11
- - WmAx   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Jun 1 2004, 04:11 PM)Thank y...   Jun 2 2004, 01:52
- - Pio2001   QUOTE (WmAx @ Jun 2 2004, 01:52 AM)A signfica...   Jun 7 2004, 20:43
- - WmAx   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Jun 7 2004, 11:43 AM)[ QUOTE...   Jun 7 2004, 22:22
- - Pio2001   QUOTE (WmAx @ Jun 7 2004, 10:22 PM)Thank you ...   Jun 7 2004, 23:06
- - Pio2001   In French, a positive ABX result between castanet2...   Jul 2 2004, 22:01
|- - WmAx   I can not read French and a translator makes a mes...   Jul 26 2004, 18:55
|- - Pio2001   QUOTE (WmAx @ Jul 26 2004, 06:55 PM)Taking in...   Jul 26 2004, 21:09
|- - WmAx   QUOTE I agree with you. If we want to prove that u...   Jul 26 2004, 21:33
|- - krabapple   I'd be curious to know the conclusions of that...   Aug 20 2004, 07:27
|- - WmAx   QUOTE (krabapple @ Aug 20 2004, 01:27 AM)I...   Aug 20 2004, 18:47
- - Pio2001   I didn't have the time yet to read all this pa...   Aug 20 2004, 12:14
|- - WmAx   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Aug 20 2004, 06:14 AM)I didn...   Aug 20 2004, 18:33
- - unfortunateson   I created a 96khz sample (a bad electric guitar do...   Apr 16 2008, 06:02
- - Axon   Interesting. How did you downsample it?   Apr 16 2008, 07:02
|- - unfortunateson   QUOTE (Axon @ Apr 15 2008, 23:02) Interes...   Apr 16 2008, 07:23
- - unfortunateson   QUOTE (unfortunateson @ Apr 15 2008, 22:0...   Apr 17 2008, 22:55
- - unfortunateson   ABX log for 96khz vs 44.1khz resample (r8brain res...   Apr 18 2008, 03:47
|- - user   You have compared 96-24 vs. 44.1-16. There were ch...   Apr 18 2008, 12:55
|- - unfortunateson   QUOTE (user @ Apr 18 2008, 04:55) You hav...   Apr 18 2008, 16:19
|- - Nick.C   QUOTE (unfortunateson @ Apr 18 2008, 16:1...   Apr 18 2008, 16:28
- - MLXXX   I assumed Unfortunateson had left the material at ...   Apr 18 2008, 15:11
|- - user   Hi MLXXX, can you also test some other ABX, with ...   Apr 18 2008, 16:11
- - MLXXX   Hi user, I had no desire to introduce an additiona...   Apr 18 2008, 16:36


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: 20th December 2014 - 02:47