Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
To Arny,
I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. T |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? First positive report I've ever heard of. I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Your playback system may have nonlinear distortion that intermodates content 19 KHz down into lower frequencies. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. Try a better playback system (especially your audio interface on the Mac) and see what happens. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
Thomas A wrote:
To Arny, I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. You sure you can hear 18KHz - not intermod products ? You must be very young..... geoff |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message om I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? First positive report I've ever heard of. How about the 16/32? I started with this test to figure out what to listen for. How are other people hearing this? I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Your playback system may have nonlinear distortion that intermodates content 19 KHz down into lower frequencies. Yes, agreed. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. Try a better playback system (especially your audio interface on the Mac) and see what happens. I am going to buy the M-audio transit, and try it out. It measures ok, I guess: http://www.fixup.net/products/benchm...ransit1644.htm |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Thomas A" wrote in message om I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? First positive report I've ever heard of. How about the 16/32? I started with this test to figure out what to listen for. How are other people hearing this? They hear it as sounding the same as the reference. I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Your playback system may have nonlinear distortion that intermodates content 19 KHz down into lower frequencies. Yes, agreed. In days of yore, a sound card called the PAS-16 that did this. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. Try a better playback system (especially your audio interface on the Mac) and see what happens. I am going to buy the M-audio transit, and try it out. It measures ok, I guess: http://www.fixup.net/products/benchm...ransit1644.htm Yes, that looks pretty good. The problem with USB 1.1 has always been a tendency towards clicks and pops on some machines. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message ...
Thomas A wrote: To Arny, I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. You sure you can hear 18KHz - not intermod products ? You must be very young..... geoff That is from my speakers and test CD, not from computer. Depends of course of SPL, don't remember now what I used. 17 kHz is fine. 18 kHz is well, very faint. 19 kHz is nothing. I am not very young, but that is a relative term. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Thomas A" wrote in message om I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? First positive report I've ever heard of. I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Your playback system may have nonlinear distortion that intermodates content 19 KHz down into lower frequencies. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. Try a better playback system (especially your audio interface on the Mac) and see what happens. I remade a test today quite sloppy (I was in a hurry doing other things) with better headphones using the 16/32 vs 16/44.1 and decided for n=50. I got 35/50, p0.05. What has people reported with 16/32? When I get the USB soundcard later this week I will give another report. Probably the audible phenomenon dissappears. T |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
ABX question - Arny K
"Thomas A" wrote in message
om "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Thomas A" wrote in message om I get significant p-values (0.05, n=100) when I test the samples 16/44.1 vs 16/38 downsampled triangle. Is that a common observation? First positive report I've ever heard of. I only use cheap headphones, but there is a slight noticable difference in the attack rate of the triangle. However, I can only faintly hear 18 kHz, nothing at 19 kHz for static tones. Your playback system may have nonlinear distortion that intermodates content 19 KHz down into lower frequencies. Or perhaps there is some malfunction of the ABX software for mac? I did not expect to get this value, but I will repeat this again. Try a better playback system (especially your audio interface on the Mac) and see what happens. I remade a test today quite sloppy (I was in a hurry doing other things) with better headphones using the 16/32 vs 16/44.1 and decided for n=50. I got 35/50, p0.05. What has people reported with 16/32? Again, very little. There's a reason why the 28 and 22 KHz SR samples are provided. ;-) When I get the USB soundcard later this week I will give another report. Probably the audible phenomenon dissappears. Wating on the proverbial pins and needles. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Question for Arny | Audio Opinions | |||
Using DJ Amplifiers in Home Theater | Audio Opinions | |||
Question about Jupiter | Audio Opinions | |||
How many people listen to FM ? | Audio Opinions |