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 Aug 20 2004, 12:14
Post #2


Moderator


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



I didn't have the time yet to read all this page, that seems interesting : http://www.zainea.com/firing.htm

...but it reports the results of Bloom and Preis : they didn't test the audibility of the antialias itself, but the audibility of group delay in the antialias. Also, they tested 4 kHz and 15 kHz antialias. So it's irrelevant for the audibility of anti alias in 44.1 kHz DACs

Edit : oops, sorry WmAx, I didn't see your edit. Are there some more info in this paper ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
WmAx
post Aug 20 2004, 18:33
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 541
Joined: 22-May 04
Member No.: 14243



QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Aug 20 2004, 06:14 AM)
I didn't have the time yet to read all this page, that seems interesting : http://www.zainea.com/firing.htm

...but it reports the results of Bloom and Preis : they didn't test the audibility of the antialias itself, but the audibility of group delay in the antialias. Also, they tested 4 kHz and 15 kHz antialias. So it's irrelevant for the audibility of anti alias in 44.1 kHz DACs

Edit : oops, sorry WmAx, I didn't see your edit. Are there some more info in this paper ?
*


Actually, the findins are relevent to 44.1. THe purpose of the paper was to test for sensitivity of a given filter at a determined frequency. At 15kHz, in this test, no one could detect a change with an extremely sharp 'brickwall' filter(as some call it - thought not truly a brick wall filter) in place. At higher frequencies, the sensitivity is logically further reduced. If you can not detect the filter at 15kHz, it's not logical to assume it can be heard at 20 or 21 kHz. The Optimal Bandwidth for Sound Transmission paper I referenced earlier in this thread also uses a sharp filter in order to accurately test for bandwidth sensitivity with all releveant factors(including the sharp anti-alias filter). Again, they were not even able to get to 20kHz before no one could identify a difference. As for aliasing errors becoming audible, that is anothe issue from the bandwidth/filter rate issues, though directly affeted by the filter. However, I can not imagine that aliasing errors being of a magnitude to be of any concern today. Upsampling/interpolation has been a standard feature of most cd player DACs for at least 2 decades - for the very purpose of decreasing errors by way of a higher precision anti-alias filter. But maybe I'm missing something?

If either you or krabapple need a paper that I reference, just email me. ( wmax@linaeum.com )

-Chris

This post has been edited by WmAx: Aug 20 2004, 19:23
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: 30th August 2014 - 04:00